IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.0 


1.1 


1.25 


lliW2»    12.5 
m    112.0 


1.8 


U.  11 1.6 


7] 


olfe 


/ 


'/ 


/A 


VV'^^^ 


5b-.  -^J5, 


'^ 


'ib 


ts 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  institute  for  Historical  l\/licroreproduction8 


institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


1980 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


□    Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 

□   Covers  damaged/ 
Couverture  endommagde 

□   Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaurie  et/ou  pellicul6e 


D 


D 

D 


D 


Cover  title  missing/ 

Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 


0   Coloured  maps/ 
Cartes  g6ographiques  en  couleur 

□    Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 

□    Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 


D 


Bound  with  other  material/ 
Reli6  avec  d'autres  documents 

Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  reliure  serrde  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distortion  le  long  de  la  marge  intdrieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  be^n  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajout6es 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  !e  texte. 
mais,  lorsque  cela  6tait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6t6  filmdes. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppl6mentalres: 


L'institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  6t6  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-dtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  m6thode  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiqu6s  ci-dessous. 


I      I   Coloured  pages/ 


Pages  de  couleur 

Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommag6es 

Pages  restored  and/oi 

Pages  restaurdes  et/ou  pellicul6es 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxe( 
Pages  d6color6es,  tachetdes  ou  piqudes 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  ddtachdes 

Showthrough/ 
Transparence 

Quality  of  prir 

Qualit^  indgale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  materic 
Comprend  du  materiel  supplementaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 


I      I  Pages  damaged/ 

I      I  Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 

r~~|  Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 

I      I  Pages  detached/ 

I      I  Showthrough/ 

|~~|  Quality  of  print  varies/ 

I      I  Includes  supplementary  material/ 

I — I  Only  edition  available/ 


D 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  6t6  filmdes  d  nouveau  de  fapon  d 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


El 

10X 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  film6  au  taux  de  reduction  indiquA  ci-dessous. 

14X  18X  22X 


26X 


30X 


12X 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

National  Library  of  Canada 


L'exemplaire  film6  fut  reproduit  grdce  d  la 
g6n6ro8it6  de: 

Bibliothdque  nationale  du  Canada 


The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Les  images  suivantes  ont  6t6  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  et 
de  la  nettet6  de  l'exemplaire  fiim6,  et  en 
conformity  avec  ies  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


Les  exempiaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprimie  sont  fiimds  en  commengant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'Impression  ou  d'illustration,  soit  par  ie  second 
plat,  salon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autrss  exempiaires 
originaux  sont  fiim6s  en  commenpant  par  la 
premidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'Impression  ou  d'illustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  —•^'  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED "),  or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 


Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaitra  sur  la 
dernidre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbols  — ►  signifie  "A  SUIVRE",  le 
symbols  V  signifie  "FIN". 


Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  dtre 
filmds  d  des  taux  de  reduction  diff6rents. 
Lorsque  ie  document  est  trop  grand  pour  Atre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clich6,  il  est  film6  d  partir 
da  Tangle  sup6rieur  gauche,  de  gauche  d  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  n^cessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  m6thode. 


1 

2 

3 

1 

2 

3 

„.     ^'^ 

• 

6 

■ 

iMimrt*<ttliK.-i 


^ 


iJ«HI*' 


'■^■■,ir  ^«,*"|.ii'J|''"  JJU'w  ■¥  I"  n.rr  I 


>  .mm'i*iW>iM- .  wbiMMbu 


':^^J 


»ti  VV^ .  4i«f*»   I  ■KJIiaw  >i*!.***-^mV'^-  «Mi»«M(fW»>>«i>;;«^M 


..A* 


^^V: 


i.''^,. 


4.f-T 


M 


^-i^+i^'i^^'-^n*'**--- 


. .      'ft'  v» 


,,,...^<'.j^,rHi;'-' 


•1' 


s.  ■■  f-  •        s  «V        -^   .y.       v.:i> '     , 


■,nC' 


"S. 


.jvw:- 


.    >    •^ 


■';■•* 

1,%: 

^.       1" 

■  i 

■5 

.H'- 

:^ 

.  rf'.  ■ 

<'^  '     .,-, 

.viJ-w**-*"  • 

j,!l.lt'»P 


^-•k;^-' 


';*«!■■  V 


V*^-V'-.')i!K-;**:'-i-.'TL.:a,.., 


.■f^','^ 


.  ,..^, ..-..*«.■  jw*^*''**         ■■■.J  ■; 


-■.  ,1,,, ....... 

.",.:;  i- 

'1--^ .  1 

■fc^r^^ 

^. 


I 


itPi-V'- 


r. 


)  ^'9 


H*/' 


^^„ 


-t- 


r.,1,:. 


■  '^.':^  \A  NA  ;^.      .^.K"!'  li 


-  'ii.,  *:■'  ■as 


^:2k '}.  \\  "^  ',)  ■ 
...  "^'  ft 

'■'.    V     e     A   J     »^"t; 


J^ 


'>'l'R!lOl>Hlf.ilir,i  P«vTil.ilH  B«."a 


e,     '  OF     THE 

UNITKD  STATES 


^./■■fmr>^».rft^,  !>•>• 


u-,isi-S''    l»>ntii!--.,,.. 


■;  (■ 


.»nMi   '  ■  r^vat»0mii*ini\»  •  :■  --»»«i^*«_i"*-  ••*^-#.    n^i.-^^^^Ar-tvi 


f'  II  /j-'^  uwv}/:  \ 


'*-, 


•4 


.'■^ 


,;l 
1  , 


.,Wf 


# 


•ei 


,< 


■'"1 


■f ! x'  '^  ,w:^ '^  -i''.--;   a 


■#  i  "^^ 


■  if^"Tin'i'iiiri'ii'i'i1ii  '~iTT"'nir"YnVirir'-iV-MTi''''TViilVn^il(''  rffff  I'l','.,' 


.b<««*»Vi..i4i-.t 


/^a 


A 


THE 


LOUISIANA  PURCHASE 


AND 


OUR  TITLE  WEST  OF  THE  ROCKY 
MOUNTAINS, 


WITH 


........,| 


i^r'^1 


A  REVIEW  OF  ANNEXATION  BY  THE  UNITED  STATES. 


BY 


BINGER  HERMANN, 

COMMISSIONER   OK  THK   GENERAL   LAND   OFiacE. 


WASHINGTON: 

GOVBRNMENT   PRINTING   OFFICE. 

1898. 


V    <% 


4". 


1 


SYNOPSIS 


:« 


1 


P.TRf. 

TIIH  I.oriSIANA  PURCHAvSK 1 1 

Urror  in  United  States  map 1 1 

What  was  the  orij^inal  Louisiana  ? 12 

LaSalle's  descent  of  the  Mississippi 12 

LaSalle  takes  possession  in  name  of  Louis  XIV 12 

IJeTonty's  narrative  of  the  discovery 12 

Iherville's  exploration  of  the  mouth  of  the  Mississipjji ....  i-^ 

Settlement  at  Bilo.vi i  -^ 

Spanish  claim  to  territory  along  Gulf  east  of  Mi.s.sissippi 13 

De  Soto  at  Tampa  Hay i  •^ 

rirst  .settlement  of  New  Orleans i^ 

The  j^rant  to  Crozat 14 

Moll's  map 1 1; 

Bowen's  map  of  North  America ig 

Jefferson's  letter  to  Mellish ig 

rVanquelin's  map i  ^,  16 

*                                 Crozat's  colony  abandoned 16 

Fr.\nce  Ckdks  to  Spain 17 

Treaty  between  I'Vance  and  Spain 17 

Louisiana  a  troublesome  and  expensive  province iS 

De  Ulloa's  arrival  at  New  Orleans iS 

His  expulsion 1  g 

Spanish  fleet  appears  before  New  Orleans 20 

Spain  Cedk.s  Florida  to  Great  Britain 20 

Confu.sing  treaties 20 

The  family  compact 21 

Talleyrand's  explanation 21 

The  FloRida.s  Retroceued  to  Spain 23 

The  Uniteij  States  and  .Spain 2^ 

Southern  boundary  defined 2^ 

American  settlements 2", 

The  navigation  of  the  Mississippi 2^ 

Popular  discontent 25 

Attempts  to  secure  commercial  privileges 2g 

3paIN   RETROCEDES  to   FR.A.NCE 26 

The  treaty  of  San  Ildefonso,  1800 26 

Depredations  upon  our  commerce  by  France 26 

Preparations  to  resent  such  depredations 26 

Dismissal  of  our  envoys 26 

3 


Y. 


4  SYNOPSIS. 

Spain  Rktkocedks  to  I'-ranck— Continued.  Pagr.. 

Liviiigijton's  remarks afr 

ThreateiiL'd  war  bL'twecn  I'Vancc  and  I"^n>{land 27 

Moiiroi'  noiiiiiiaU'd  for  an  fxlraordiiiary  mission  to  France 27 

Nf  w  ( )rlfans  and  I'loritla  are  demanded 28' 

Napoleon  offers  to  cede  all  of  Lonisiana 28. 

Two  prominent  aciors 2u                    'W 

Thomas  Jefferson 2q 

Marejuis  de  Marbois 29 

The  American  nejjoliators yi 

Robert  R.  Livingston 3<)> 

James  Jlonroe 30 

I,<)fISIANA   CkDIU)  To  THK    UNITKU  STATHS 32 

Indefinite  boundaries 32 

Ratifications  exchanged 33 

Possession  taken 34 

A  rivalry  for  honor 35 

Livingston's  letter 35, 

The  magnitude  of  the  purchase 36 

Its  population  in  1890 36 

Statistics 36. 

Kariy  opposition  to  annexation 36 

Speeches  in  Congress  adverse  to  cession 37 

A  striking  contrast 38- 

Value  and  Resoitrcics  oi-  Loi'isiana  Pi-rchask 38 

Colorado; 

Its  gold,  silver  and  cattle 38 

Wytmiing: 

Its  cattle  and  sheep 38 

Montana: 

Its  silver,  copper,  cattle  and  sheep 3S; 

South  Dakota: 

Its  gold  and  wheat " 39 

North  Dakota: 

Its  wheat 39. 

Oklahoma: 

Its  wheat  and  cotton '. 

Its  wonderful  development 

The  Lewis  and  Ci^arke  Expedition 

Jefferson's  object  was  to  secure  trade  relations 

The  Florida  Boundaries  Uncertain 

The  United  States  dispossesses  Spain 

The  Florida  wars 

The  Florida  treaty 

Our  Western  Limit  ok  Louisiana 

La  Salle's  settlement 

The  Annexation  of  Texas 

Its  value  and  resources 

Cotton  and  live  stock 

Our  Nation  Ci.aims  Beyond  the  Rockies 

The  claims  of  England 

The  claims  of  Spain 

England's  claim  contested 

Russia's  Claim  Acknowledged 

Russia  sells  Alaska  to  the  United  States 


39' 

39                        1 

39' 

4. 

42 

45. 

47 

47                      : 

4«                      1 

48.                 4 

48,          i 

48          1 

49                       >f 

49                       i 

49           :i 

50-               ^J 

5'                        .^ 

5'                       1 

52:                      'I 

SYNOPSIS. 


Page.. 

n 

38. 
3U 
29 
29. 

.v 

3"' 
30- 
32 
32 
33 
34 
35 
35'. 
36 
36 
36- 
36 
37- 
38- 
38 

38 

3» 

39 

39' 

39' 

39 

39' 

4' 

42 

45. 

47 

47 

4.S. 

48 

48 

48 

49 

49 

49 

50- 

51 

51 

52: 


I 


I 


I 


■:> 


Rt'.ssi.v's  Ci.AtM  ACKN(nvi.ici)C.i;i)— Continued.  I'hki- 

( )p])()siti(iii  to  the  i)urchast' 52 

Speeches  in  Con^^re.s.s  adverse  thereto 52 

The  vahie  and  re.sources  of  Alaska ,Sjl 

Us  >f()ld  |)roduclion 5;, 

The  fish  of  Alaska 54 

The  fur  .seals 54 

Joint  Occri'.v.N'cv  .vnd  Nicc.otiation 55 

The  British  ultiniatiini 55 

Tlie  mystery  of  the  forty-ninth  parallel 55 

No  evidence  adoptinjj  the  forty-ninth  iiarallel 56 

Hall  J.  Kelley's  iininiKration  scheme 60 

The  Wilkes  Ivxplorinj;  I';xpe<lition 61 

American  .settlements  encouraj^ed 62 

"  rifty-four,  Forty,  or  l'i).;ht " 62 

Our  northern  houndary  defined 6;, 

•O.  .EGON   AnMITTICI)   AS  A   TiCRRlTOKV 63 

The  (|uestion  of  slavery 6,^ 

Thomas  H.  Hentoii 65 

Oregon  provisional  government 65 

The  pioneers  of  the  West 65 

The  extent  of  the  ( )regon  country 66 

A  .splendid  empire 67 

Its  value  and  resources 67 

Oregon  : 

Its  gold,  live  .stock,  wheat  and  other  products 67 

Washington : 

Its  timber,  wheat  and  live  stock    6S 

Idaho : 

Its  gold,  silver  and  live  stock 6S 

Our  Mexican  I'i^rchask 68 

Its  extent 69 

California: 

Its  gold,  wheat,  live  stock,  hay,  lumber,  barley,  wine  and  fruit.s 69 

ThK  OoI.I)    I'RODl-CT   OK  THK   I'NITKD   STATKS 69 

ThK  SiI.VKR    I'RODCCT  01'  THK    UnITKD   vSTATKS   FOR    1S96 70 

Utah : 

Its  gold,  silver,  live  .stock  and  wheat 69 

Nevada : 

Its  gold,  .silver  and  live  stock 69 

New  Mexico ; 

Its  cattle,  sheep  and  wheal 69 

Arizona : 

Its  gold,  copper,  cattle  and  sheep 70 

Total  co.st  of  annexations 70 

Imperfect  statistics  70 

Orkoon  AM)  THH  Louisiana  Purchash 70 

The  claim  of  contiguity -72 

Sir  Alexander  McKenzie's  expedition 74 

No  proof  that  Oregon  was  included  in  the  Louisiana  purchase 75 

Authorities  cited 75 

(Jfficial  declarations  increased  popular  error 75 

jKri'ERSON,  MaRBOIS,  AND   GUEENHOW 76 

Conclusions  and  recommendations 78 


SYNOPSIS. 

Pa  Re. 

REVIEW  OF  ANNEXATION  BY  THE  UNITED  vSTATES 79 

Early  objections  to  annexation  analyzed 79 

The  extent  of  our  acquisitions 79 

Remoteness 79 

The  constitutionality  of  annexation    ^ 

Annexation  an  element  of  strength ''^' 

Homogeneity  not  a  serious  objection ,. ^' 

Annexation  by  other  nations  and  their  foreign  elements *^2 

An  object  lesson  in  England's  assimilation  of  races 83 

Our  further  destiny '^4 

Our  increasing  commerce ^4 

Hawaii ^ 

Our  Asiatic  trade 5 

The  Sandwich  Islands  a  safeguard ^^ 

The  Nicaragua  Canal ^^ 


ti.:: 


Page. 
79 
79 
79 
79 
8o 
8 1 
8i 

82 

83 
84 
84 
85 
85 
86 
8& 


ILLUSTRATIONS 


Territorial  growth  of  the  Ignited  .States Frontispiece. 

Before  page. 

Map  by  Franquelin  in  1684 1 1 

Moll's  map,  17 10 jc 

Map  of  Alaska r2 

Map  of  Hawaiian  Islands 85 

Thomas  Jefferson  in  1S03 29 

Barbd  Marbois 29 

Robert  R.  Livingston 70 

President  Monroe •:  i 

William  H.  Seward re 

President  Polk 5, 

Thomas  H.  Benton gc 

7 


Departmext  of  the  Interior, 

General  Land  Office, 

IVas/iiiig/oii,  July  7,  7898. 
Sir  :  I  have  the  honor  to  submit  herewith  my  recommendation  for  a  correction 
of  the  last  published  map  of  the  United  States  by  the  Department,  so  far  as  it 
represents  the  portion  of  our  countr>-  westward  of  the  Rocky  Mountains  and 
now  embracincr  Orejron,  Washington,  Idaho  and  portions  of  Montana  and  Wyo- 
ming to  have  been  acquired  by  the  United  States  by  or  through  the  Louisiana 
Purchase,  the  correction  to  be  made  in  the  republication  of  that  map  by  the 
Department ;  and  in  connection  with  such  recommendation  I  respectfully  submit 
various  conclusions  which  I  have  reached  relating  to  this  subject,  including  a 
review  of  the  various  annexations  by  the  United  States,  which  I  hope  will  meet 
your  approval. 

Very  respectfully,  Binger  Hermann, 

Com  m  issioiier. 
Hon.  Cornelius  N.  Bliss, 

.Secretary  0/  the  Interior. 


Department  of  the  Interior, 

Washington,  July  <?,  i8g8. 
Sir:  Your  letter  of  the  7th  instant  has  been  received.  You  call  attention 
therein  to  an  error  in  the  last  map  of  the  United  States  published  by  the  Depart- 
ment (1897)  ill  so  far  as  it  represents  the  portion  of  the  couutrv  westward  of  the 
Rocky  Mountains  now  embracing  Oregon,  Washington,  Idaho  and  portions  of 
Montana  and  Wyoming  to  have  been  acquired  b>'the  United  States  hx  or  throucrh 
the  Louisiana  Purchase.  You  also  submit  in  connection  therewith  a  very  care- 
fully prepared  paper  upon  the  matter  of  the  Louisiana  Purchase,  and  upon  the 
various  annexations  made  by  the  United  States,  and  recommend  that  the  error  in 
question  be  corrected  upon  the  next  map  of  the  United  States  to  be  published  bv 
the  Department. 

Upon  careful  consideration  of  the  matter,  as  so  al)lv  presented  by  >on    ^•our 
recommendations  in  the  premises  meet  with  my  approval,  and  the  correction' will 
be  made  upon  the  next  map  of  the  United  States  to  be  issued  by  the  Department 
Very  respectfully, 

C.  N.   BLI.S.S, 

tr        n  T^  Secretary. 

Hon.  Binger  Hermann, 

Commissioner  of  the  General  Land  Office. 


n 


>  ' 


I 


J 


1 
i 


I 
I 


->'S 


THE  LOUISIANA  FIRCHASE 


AND 


OUR  TITLE  WEST  OF  THE  ROCKY  MOUNTAINS. 


WITH 


A  RBVIHW  OF  AXXHXATION  BY  THli  UMTin)  STATHS. 


By  RiNOKK  Hermann, 
Commissiotier  of  the  Cencml  Laud  Office. 


Of  all  distino;uishin^  events  in  the  glorious  career  of  this  country,  aside  frouT 
its  triumphs  for  liberty  and  for  union,  none  shine  forth  with  such  imperishable 
luster  as  the  acquisition  of  that  splendid  empire  west  of  the  Mississippi  River; 
;uk1  when  the  impartial  historian  shall  write  up  the  gre.it  men  and  the  great 
measures  of  our  nation  he  will  place  at  the  top  of  the  rolls  lipomas  Jefferson  and 
the  Louisiana  Purchase.  The  importance,  then,  of  this  subject  deserves  that  it 
shall  be  accurately  as  well  as  impartially  reviewed. 

I  am  induced  to  enter  upon  this  matter  because  of  an  error  which  I  conceive 
exists  upon  the  map  of  the  United  States  as  published  under  the  direction  of  my 
predecessor,  and  which  goes  forth  with  the  official  indorsement  of  the  Depart- 
ment. The  error  to  which  I  refer  is  in  the  representation  that  the  cession  of 
Louisiana  from  France  in  1803  conii:)rised  territory  west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains, 
now  known  as  Oregon,  Washington,  Idaho  and  portions  of  IMontana  and  Wyo- 
ming. Relieving  that  such  domain  was  derived  by  the  United  States  based  on 
the  right  of  discovery,  exploration  and  occupancy  by  our  own  people,  together 
with  the  cession  from  Spain,  by  treaty  of  February  22,  1819,  of  such  adverse 
rights  as  that  nation  claimed  to  possess,  I  have  assumed  the  liberty  of  represent- 
ing these  facts  on  the  new  edition  of  the  United  States  map  soon  to  be  published 
by  the  Department. 

In  support  of  this  position  I  submit  the  conclusions  to  which  I  have  arrived, 
together  with  the  views  of  eminent  historians,  diplomats,  statesmen  and  writers 
on  both  sides  of  this  interesting  and  famous  contention.  In  subsequent  pages 
I  shall  refer  to  the  value  of  this  acquisition  and  to  the  advantages  which  have 
followed  our  other  annexations  to  the  public  domain. 


II 


12  THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


WHAT  WAS  THE  ORIGINAL  LOUISIANA? 


First,  it  may  be  asked,  what  was  oris^inally  understood  to  be  the  Louisiana 
territory?  It  is  essential  that  wc  know  the  extent  of  this  domain  as  it  was 
understood  by  the  men  who  discovered,  explored  and  named  it,  and  then 
described  it  to  the  world. 

La  Salle  was  the  first  to  descend  the  Mississippi  from  its  navigable  northern 
waters  to  its  mouth,  and  from  the  Gulf  inward  again.  His  discovery  was  not  a 
mere  accident,  nor  was  it  left  unwritten  and  in  doubt.  His  journey  was  under- 
taken for  purposes  of  discovery,  and  every  important  observation  was  carefully 
noted  and  reported  by  him.  He  was  a  man  of  education  and  received  a  patent  of 
nobility.  His  expeditions  were  under  the  authority  of  the  French  Government, 
and  he  early  won  the  confidence  and  admiration  of  that  nation's  monarch,  Louis 
XIV.  The  Chevalier  Henry  de  Tonty,  Fathers  Hennepin  and  Membre  and  other 
well-known  explorers  were  his  companions  in  many  expeditions,  and  a  few  years 
before,  over  much  of  the  same  ground,  Marquette  and  Joliet  had  opened  the  way 
among  the  Indian  tribes.  The  result  of  his  researches  was  made  known  in 
France,  and  efforts  were  at  once  made  by  the  government  to  colonize  the  country 
and  extend  exploration. 

La  vSalle,  standing  with  Tonty,  Dautray  and  other  companions  on  the  banks 
of  the  most  western  channel  of  the  Mississippi,  about  3  leagues  from  its  mouth, 
on  April  9,  1682,  took  possession  of  the  coinitry  in  the  name  of  Louis  XI\',  and 
setting  up  a  cohnnn,  or,  as  Dr.  KoM  insists,  "a  cross  with  arms  of  the  King," 
buried  a  plate,  unfurled  the  flag  of  i^Yance,  sung  a  Te  Deum  and  naming  the 
country  "Louisiana"  in  a  loud  voice,  proclaimed  its  extent  to  be  "from  the  mouth 
of  the  great  river  St.  Louis,  on  the  eastern  side,  otherwise  called  Ohio,  Alighin, 
Sipore,  or  Chiskagona,  and  this  with  tlie  cmsent  of  the  Chaonanons,  Chikachas 
and  other  people  dwelling  therein  with  whom  we  have  made  alliance,  as  also  along 
the  river  Colbert,  or  Mississippi  and  rivers  which  discharge  iliemselves  therein, 
from  its  source  be>'ond  the  Kious  or  Nadonessions,  and  this  with  their  con.sent, 
and  with  the  consent  of  the  Motanties,  Illinois,  Mesigameus,  ''latches,  Koroas, 
which  are  the  most  considerable  nations  dwelling  therein,  with  whom  also  we  have 
made  alliance  *  *  *  as  far  as  its  mouth  at  the  .sea  or  Gulf  of  Mexico  *  *  * 
and  also  to  the  mouth  of  the  river  Palms,  upon  the  assurance  which  we  have 
received  from  all  these  nations  that  we  are  the  first  Europeans  who  have  descended  ;| 

or  ascended  the  .said  river  Colbert."  S 

He  also  named  the  Mississippi  ' '  Colbert,"  in  honor  of  his  friend  and  patron,  M.  # 

Colbert,  the  colonial  minister  under  Louis  XIV,  and  upon  whose  report  the  King 
conferred  upon  La  Salle  the  rank  of  esquire,  with  power  to  acquire  knighthood. 

De  Tonty,  La  Salle's  companion,  who  has  written  a  detailed  narrative  of 
the  discovery,  describes  the  countries  at  the  heads  of  the  various  tributaries  of  the 
Mississippi,  all  of  which  were  included  under  the  name  of  "Louisiana,"  and  it  is 
remarkable  how  accuratelv  he  estimates  the  distance  of  one  river  from  another 


u 


t 


■A 


.•^ 


sr^ 


MAP    OF    FRANOUELIN      1684. 


THE   LOrivSIANA   PURCHASE. 


13 


i 


'.uid  the  leii^^h  ot  each.  The  Falls  of  St.  Anthony  seem  to  have  been  known,  as 
Hennepin  was  sent  by  La  Salle  to  that  point,  and  the  Missouri  from  its  sonrce  is 
mentioned  and  described  at  different  points.  A  map  prepared  by  De  Tonty,  as  he 
states,  accompanied  his  report  and  exhibited  the  j^feneral  scope  of  conntr\-  embraced 
witliin  lyonisiana.  Unfortnnately  nothinj;  more  is  known  of  this  map.  No  refer- 
ence, however,  was  ever  made  to  any  conntry  westward  of  the  highlands  which  are 
the  sonrces  of  the  rivers  flowing  fron  the  west  into  the  Mississippi;  and  Lonisiana 
was  never  nnderstood  as  extendin<^  beyond  those  highlands  by  any  of  these  explorers. 
This  is  fnrther  corroborated  by  F'ranqnelin,  a  yonng  French  engineer,  who  was  in 
Qnebec  when  La  Salle  retnrned  from  his  discovery,  and  who  learned  from  him  the 
extent  of  the  same,  and  then  crudely  majjped  the  country  on  what  has  since  been 
known  as  Franquelin's  Great  Map  of  1684,  on  which  is  shown  Louisiana  with  the 
western  boundary-  on  the  head  waters  of  the  Mississippi. 

On  March  2,  1699,  Iberville,  a  daring  French  explorer,  entered  the  mouth  of 
the  I,i..,jissippi  and  ascended  100  leagues,  and  on  descending  passed  through  the 
river  Iberville,  named  for  him,  and  thence  through  lakes  Maurepas  and  Pontchar- 
train  into  the  Gulf.  The  last-named  lake  was  named  by  Iberville  in  honor  of  the 
Count  de  Pontchartrain,  who  was  minister  of  marine  under  Louis  XIV.  The 
former  lake  was  named  after  Coinit  Maurepas,  minister  under  Louis  XV  and  Louis 
XVI,  and  who  died  with  the  ill-fated  King. 

The  land  westward  of  these  waterways  and  eastward  of  the  Mississippi  from 
the  island  of  New  Orleans,  being  a  part  of  the  French  discoveries,  is  properly 
included  in  Louisiana.  In  1721  F'rench  immigrants  arrived  at  Mobile  Bay  and  at 
Biloxi,  and  previous  to  this  the  French  C;  idian,  Du  Tissenet,  with  an  escort, 
went  from  Dauphine  Island  by  way  of  Mobile  river  '  Quebec.  The  first  colony 
was  settled  at  Riloxi  in  1699.  It  was  for  some  time  the  chief  settlement  of 
Louisiana,  and  contained  a  fort. 

To  the  east  of  the  Mississippi,  F'ranqtielin  has  shown  Florida  with  a  dotted 
bound  irv  which  was  then  much  as  it  is  at  present,  except  that  for  some  distance 
east  of  the  Mississippi  the  country  then  was  included  in  Louisiana.  The  map  is 
also  evidence  of  the  presence  of  the  Spaniards,  and  La  Salle  in  his  memorials 
presented  to  the  King  his  scheme  of  erecting  fortifications  near  the  mouths  of  the 
Mississippi  and  then  of  driving  out  the  neighboring  Spanish  colonists.  Here  we 
have  at  the  very  outset  material  for  the  subsequent  disputes  as  to  West  Florida, 
and  the  uncertainty  as  to  whether  it  was  French  in  the  Louisiana  claim  or  Florida 
under  prior  Spanish  discovery.  .\t  this  point  it  may  be  as  well  to  inquire  into  the 
claim  of  the  Spaniards  as  to  that  territory  along  the  Gulf  east  of  the  Mississippi. 
Commencing  with  Ponce  de  Leon,  who  reached  the  coast  of  Florida  near  the 
present  site  of  St.  Augustine  March  27,  1512,  we  next  find  Miruelo.  who  arrived 
from  Cuba  in  1516 ;  tlien  De  CordoVa,  who  arrived  in  1517  with  an  expedition  of 
Spaniards  who  were  seeking  gold  ;  and  he  was  followed  by  Alaminos  with  several 
ships  for  the  same  purpose.  In  1539  we  find  Hernando  de  Soto  landing  witli  a 
large  company  of  Spaniards  at  Tampa  Bay,  and  from  there  he  went  to  Tallahassee;. 


14  THK   LOUISIANA    PURCHASE. 

thence  he  moved  to  the  Savannah  River  behiw  the  i)resent  site  of  AnjLjnsta,  and 
then  toward  the  head  of  Mobile  Hay,  and  then  to  the  Mississippi,  whieh  lie  dis- 
covered near  the  month  of  the  Arkansas.  After  his  death,  near  the  month  of 
Red  river,  his  snccessor,  Lnis  de  Moscoso,  took  the  command,  nnmberinjif  about 
300,  down  the  MisMssippi  to  the  (Vnlf,  July  18,  1543. 

Ill  1528  De  Narvaez  led  a  larj^e  force  of  Spaniards  and  landed  in  Clear  Water 
Bay,  followinj^  alon.i>;  the  (inlf  shore  on  the  west.  A  portion  returned  to  Cuba, 
while  the  jj^reater  portion  were  destroyed.  None  made  settlement.  Still  further 
east  on  the  Florida  coast  French  colonies  were  founded,  but  these  were  driven  out 
in  1563  by  Menendez  with  Spanish  troops,  who  then  erected  forts  from  vSt.  .Xnj^us- 
tine  northward  as  far  as  Carolina.  This  possession  was  maintained  to  the  time 
when  La  Salle  claimed  Louisiana  for  France.  It  may  be  said  of  the  Si)aniards, 
however,  that  they  made  no  .ittempt  to  gain  a  foothold  far  in  the  interior,  ard  this 
explains  the  narrow  limit  of  their  possession  north  from  the  (iulf  Bienville  was 
appointed  governor  of  Louisiana  in  171 7,  and  one  of  his  first  acts  in  that  year 
was  to  select  a  principal  establishment  for  the  French  colony,  which  he  did  by 
choosing  the  site  which  is  now  the  city  of  New  Orleans.  It  was  then  covered  by 
a  dense  forest,  the  sT)il  being  swampy.  A  detachment  of  soldiers  was  left  there  for 
the  double  purpose  of  clearing  the  ground  and  of  protecting  the  colonists.  This 
was  the  origin  of  New  Orleans,  named  in  honor  of  the  Duke  of  Orleans,  the  then 
regent  of  France.  In  1723  the  seat  of  government  was  definitely  removed  to  that 
place,  which  then  contained  300  population.  It  is  worthy  of  notice  at  this  point 
that  in  this  year  the  French  (Government  considered  the  importance  of  securing 
deeper  water  at  the  entrance  to  the  Mississippi,  and  that  the  official  engineer — 
Pauger — had  recommended  a  plan  of  improvement  which  was  in  principle  based 
largely  on  the  modern  jetty  system. 

On  September  14,  1712,  a  grant  was  made  by  Louis  XIV  to  Antoine  de 
Crozat,  a  rich  merchant  of  Paris,  for  trading  purposes.  The  King  in  this  grant 
says: 

*  *  *  we  dirt  in  the  year  1683  give  our  orders  to  undertake  a  discovery  of  the  countries  and 
lands  whicli  are  situated  in  the  northern  part  of  America,  between  '^Tew  I'rance  and  New  Mexico:  and 
the  Sieur  de  hi  Salle,  to  whom  we  connnitted  that  enterprise,  having  had  success  enoujjh  to  confirm  a 
belief  that  coninuinication  might  be  settled  from  New  France  to  the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  by  means  of 
large  rivers;  this  obliged  us,  immediately  after  the  peace  of  Ryswick,  to  give  orders  for  the  estab- 
lishing of  a  colony  there,  and  maintaining  a  garrison,  which  has  kept  and  preserved  the  possession 
we  had  taken  in  the  very  year  i6cS3,  of  the  lands,  coasts,  and  islands,  which  are  situated  in  the  Gulf 
of  Mexico,  between  Carolina  on  the  east,  and  Old  and  New  Mexico  on  the  west.      *'     *  And 

whereas,  upon  the  infonnation  we  have  received,  concerning  the  disposition  and  situation  of  the  .ssiid 
countries,  known  at  present  by  the  name  of  the  province  of  Louisiana,  we  are  of  opinion  that  there 
niaj-  be  established  therein  a  considerable  commerce  *  *  *  we  have  resolved  to  grant  the  com- 
merce of  the  country  of  Louisiana  to  the  sieur  Anthony  Crozat. 

The  further  language  of  this  grant  sheds  more  light  in  identifying  the  limits 
of  this  province  in  these  words: 

and  do  appoint  the  said  sieur  Crozat,  solely  to  carry  on  a  trade  in  all  the  lands,  possessed  by 
us,  and  bounded  by  New  Mexico,  and  by  the  lands  of  the  English  Carolina,     *    *    *    the  river  of 


J-  -■• 


,/ 


■\'/-.    A    \\' 

/.  \  V.  WW 


i„.u  s'A<.vv\o  Vi  r     -  ;V',  i  ,iio\K  V.  KUv^":iV\  X  .-\   ^^■v^  -\'o    tj  f\ 


'.N\ 


0\\^    7^A:sV    'i'-'X    "sViO'ttK    V\C.UiV\0\    A\    C>:X  vv  ^  vAa;>H 


jToi  m 


I'* 


{4f^    l><f   i  r'..t    l'c,nM«'i,/i-n 


y 


/    / 


\ 


71 


/ 


\ 


>/ 


/ 


^; 


,v 


Mi  / 


S   0 


i 


iJson|s 


.'.uiiW 


i^' 


y 


j« 


111 


ifi 


'// 


;W 


rAl^ 


^. 


-V      kJ/    n    -  //     ■•  '^•JSv  \    y    .;.u:il«  i^\l^ ^v'vSrx* ir- viand 


.?^^ 

M    \ 


■w^Vty'" — 1 r 


-  + — 


.cor''  "-<-^y'r.,Kr^-^J    ^-^,^0"^"^     V^^  ^— 4*^:*  v'kecward  ; 

«K-'"^*'T'  ^^'    rioRTH    Sea      |  r^;v.v,^Ji  ^' 


Thb  Great 
SouTH\  Sea 


Cocos^ 


^'fi<  ■  rnay 


C«f^  f-'r/tncfSCO-z.f 


t..B;.K .;.:.,  ;...^,ja;juy»=. 


1 


i>.j1,.^4r.>Vff^^j..ii..,;i'i,  r,v,..v.ij.,;..a^l^^,j-i^..i..,  .■iJ,.-.u:.aiv^.-,v.  ^t,. 


S<jfuinoc/ie/  line. 


Part  Or  Map  By  Herman  Moll, English  Geographer] 

PUBLISHED  IN  LONDON  ABOUT  THE  YEAR  1710. 


I 


Ncv    Mcx. 


THE    LOUISIANA    I'URCIIASP:. 


15 


/'.  las 


RAPHER, 


St.  Lewis,  hiTftofori-  called  MissisMippi,  from  the  edge  of  the  sea,  as  fur  as  the  Illinois,  loKetlier  with 
the  river  of  St.  Philip,  heretofore  called  the  .MissourvH,  *  *  *  with  all  the  countries,  territories, 
takes  within  land,  and  the  rivers  which  fall  directly  or  indirectly  into  that  part  of  the  river  St.  Lewis. 
I.  Our  pleasure  is  that  all  the  aforesaid  lands,  streams,  rivers  and  islands,  be  and  remain 
com])risi(l  under  the  name  of  the  >{oveniment  of  Louisiana,  which  shall  lie  de]H.MideMt  upon  the 
j{eneral  government  of  New  I'rance,     »     *     »     * 

A  map  publisht'd  about  1710  l)y  Moll,  the  ICnj^lish  jreoirrapher,  rei)re.scnt.s 
Louisiana  to  he  a.s  Koui.s  XI\'  describes  it.  To  the  east  ami  aloujj  the  Gulf  coast 
the  country  contaiuinjj  the  Carolinas  is  marked  as  British  Empire.  On  the 
west,  as  a  bouudary,  is  New  Mexico  and  Old  .Mexico,  while  on  the  no-th  is  New 
Krancc,  Lake  Huron,  and  Upper  Lake  (vSu])erior).  A  portion  of  the  western 
boundar\  is  sliown  as  the  "North  River"  (Del  Norte  iver).  The  more  north- 
western boundaries  are  represented  by  the  highlands  at  the  sources  of  the  Missis- 
sippi and  the  Missouri,  marked  on  the  map,  respectively,  as  the  rivers  St.  Louis 
and  St.  IMiilip.  Nothinjij  west  of  the  Rocky  Moinitains  is  desi}.jnated  as  Louisiana, 
and  all  north  of  California  is  marked  as  "Unknown  Parts." 

In  a  later  map,  and  before  1762,  published  by  Thomas  Howen,  entitled  "An 
accurate  map  of  North  America  from  the  best  authorities,"  the  country  north  of 
Cape  Blanco  (on  the  Orej^on  coast)  is  marked  as  "Unknown,"  while  that  east  of 
the  Rio  del  Norte  and  the  Rocky  Mountains,  and  the  country  drained  by  the  waters 
of  the  Mi.ssouri  and  Mississippi  and  as  far  east  as  the  "  Apalachan  Mountains"  is 
marked  as  Louisiana,  while  Florida,  tieor^ia,  Carolina,  Virj^^inia  and  Penn.syl- 
vania,  to  the  east  of  these  mountains,  are  all  excluded  from  the  boundaries  of 
Louisiana.  This  map  will  be  found  in  Brooks's  (kizetteer,  ist  edition,  1762.  As 
.showinjf  Jefferson's  knowledjje  as  to  what  con.stituted  Louisiana,  his  letter  to 
Mellish,  the  geographer,  is  submitted,  as  follows: 

MoNTiCKi.i.o,  /h'cnnhri-  J/,  /S/6. 
To  Mr.  Mkm.ish. 

Sir,  Your  favor  of  November  23(1,  after  a  very  long  passage,  i.s  received,  and  with  it  the  map 
which  you  have  been  so  kind  as  to  .send  me,  for  which  I  return  you  many  thanks.  It  is  handsomely 
executed,  and  on  a  well  chosen  scale;  giving  a  luminous  view  of  the  comparative  po.ssession  of  differ 
ent  powers  in  our  .Vmerica.  It  is  on  account  of  the  value  I  set  on  it,  that  I  will  make  some 
suggestions. 

Hy  the  charter  of  Louis  XIV.  all  the  country  comprehending  the  waters  which  flow  into  the 
Mi.s.sissi])pi,  was  made  a  part  of  Louisiana.  Consetpiently  its  northern  boundary  was  the  summit  of 
the  highlands  in  which  its  northern  waters  ri.se. 

Hut  by  the  Xth  Art.  of  the  Treaty  of  Utrecht,  France  and  I';nglan<l  agreed  t<j  appoint  connnis- 
sioners  to  settle  the  boundary  between  their  pos.sessions  in  that  quarter,  and  those  commissioners  set- 
tled it  at  the  49th  degree  of  latitude.  See  Ilutchin.son's  Topographical  Description  of  Louisiana,  p.  7. 
This  it  was  which  induced  the  British  Commi.ssioners,  in  settling  the  bouiiUiry  with  us,  to  follow  the 
northern  water  line  to  the  Lake  of  the  Woods,  at  the  latitude  of  49°,  and  then  go  off  on  that  parallel. 
This,  then,  is  the  true  northern  boundary  of  Loui.siana. 

The  western  boundary  of  Loui.siana  is,  rightfully,  the  Rio  Hravo,  (its  main  stream,)  from  its 
mouth  to  its  .source,  and  thence  along  the  highlands  and  mountains  <lividing  the  waters  of  the  Mis- 
sissippi from  those  of  the  Pacific.  The  u.surpations  of  Spain  on  the  east  side  of  that  river,  have  induced 
geographers  to  suppose  the  Puerco  or  Salado  to  be  the  boundar)-.  The  line  along  the  highlands 
stands  on  the  charter  of  Louis  XIV.  that  of  the  Rio  Bravo,  on  the  circumstance  that,  when  La  Salle 


I 


i6 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


took  possession  of  the  Bay  of  St.  Rernanl,  Panuco  was  the  nearest  possession  of  Spain,  and  the  Rio 
Bravo  the  natural  half  way  boundary  between  them. 

On  the  waters  of  the  racific,  we  can  found  no  claim  in  right  of  Louisiana.  If  we  claim  that  coun- 
try at  all,  it  nm.st  be  on  A.stor's  settlement  near  the  mouth  of  the  Columbia,  and  the  principle  of  the 
jus  ffciitium  of  America,  that  when  a  civilized  nation  takes  pos.session  of  the  mouth  of  a  river  in  a  new 
country,  that  possession  is  considered  as  including  all  its  waters. 

The  line  of  latitude  of  the  southern  source  of  the  Multnomat  might  be  claimed  as  appurtenant 
to  .\storia.  For  its  northern  boundary,  I  believe  an  understanding  has  been  come  to  between  our 
government  and  Russia,  which  might  be  known  from  some  of  its  members.     I  do  not  know  it. 

Although  the  irksomeness  of  writing,  which  you  may  perceive  frotn  the  present  letter,  and  its 
labor,  oblige  me  now  to  withdraw  from  letter  writing,  yet  the  wish  that  your  map  should  .set  to  rights 
the  ideas  of  our  own  countrymen,  as  well  as  foreign  nations,  as  to  our  correct  boundaries,  has  induced 
nie  to  make  these  suggestions,  that  you  may  bestow  on  them  whatever  incjuiry  they  may  merit. 
I  salute  you  with  esteem  and  respect. 

Perhaps  tlie  most  noted  map  of  this  period  is  that  by  the  French  eno;ineer, 
Louis  Franqiielin,  previou-sly  mentioned  herein,  whicli  was  published  as  early  as 
1684,  followino;  the  possession  by  France ;  and  there  is  ontlined  on  this  map  the 
boundaries  of  Louisiana  nearly  as  claimed  by  Louis  XIV,  and  tlie.se  limits  were 
justified  by  the  recognized  authority  of  those  days,  which  gave  to  the  discoverer  of 
the  mouth  of  a  river  the  whole  country  drained  by  it. 

Justin  Wiiisor,  in  his  Narrative  and  Critical  History  of  America,  in  comment- 
ing on  that  law  as  applied  to  the  discovery  of  the  Mississippi,  says: 

By  this  the  French  claim  was  bounded  by  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  westward  to  the  Rio  Grande ; 
thence  northward  to  the  rather  vague  watershed  of  what  we  now  know  as  the  Rocky  Mountains, 
with  an  indefinite  line  along  the  .source  of  the  Upper  Mississippi  and  its  higher  afllu^'Uts,  bounding 
on  the  height  of  land  which  shut  off  the  valley  of  the  Great  Lakes  until  the  Appalachians  were 
reac  jd.  Following  these  mountains  south,  the  line  skirted  the  northern  limits  of  vSpanish  I'lorida, 
and  then  turned  to  the  Gulf.  *  *  *  At  the  north  the  head  waters  of  the  great  ri\er  were  still 
unknown,  and  long  to  remain  .so. 

The  province  which  was  granted  to  Crozat  was  by  him  surrendered  back 
September  6,  1717,  and  his  colony  abandoned.  The  same  year  another  grant  was 
made  to  the  Mississippi  Commercial  Company,  under  the  regency  of  the  Duke  of 
Orleans.  This  was  the  celebrated  John  Law's  IMississippi  scheme.  This  charter 
was  later  on  also  surrendered.  This,  then,  was  the  original  and  only  Louisiana, 
and  it  is  seen  that  no  country  is  included  west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains.  France 
claimed  nothing  beyond,  and  the  country  known  as  Louisiana  was  recognized  by 
the  bounds  already  mentioned.  For  nearly  eighty  years  following  La  Salle's 
discovery  the  countrj'  named  by  him  as  Louisiana  remained  intact  as  French 
possessions;  but  its  dismemberment  and  change  of  sovereignty  was  near  at  hand. 
If  this  territory  was  Louisiana,  as  we  thus  far  understood  the  boundaries,  and  such 
as  France  had  claimed,  could  it  not  be  contended  to  be  the  same  Louisiana  that 
was  ceded  to  Spain?  Was  it  not  Spanish  domain  from  the  moment  the  cession  was 
signed  and  ratified?  A  study  of  the  treaties,  however,  which  are  to  follow,  will 
convey  that  territory  to  different  sovereignties. 


p.: 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


17 


FRANCE  CEDES  TO  SPAIN. 

The  treaty  between  France  and  Spain  of  November  3,  1762,  was  the  first  move 
in  clianjre  of  srvereignt\-.      In  that  treaty  the  j^rantinjr  words  are: 

his  Most  Christian  JIajesty  cedes  in  entire  possession,  purely  and  simply,  without  exception,  to 
his  Catholic  Maj'-sty  iind  his  successors  in  pL-rpetuity,  all  the  country  known  under  the  name  of 
Louisiana,  as  well  as  New  Orleans  and  the  island  in  '■  hicli  that  phice  stands. 

Thi.s  was  made  snbject  to  the  later  approval  and  acceptance  of  the  Spanish 
Kino^.     On  the  13th  of  the  same  montl   the  acceptance  was  made  final. 

This  treaty  between  the  two  monarchs  was  never  known  publicly  in  the  United 
States  nntil  seventy  years  after,  and  urtil  published,  in  1837,  in  the  appendix  to 
Gales  &  Seaton's  Reports  of  Debate?,  Twenty- fourth  Congress,  .second  session, 
volume  13.  Tliis  will  account  for  the  misunderstanding  among  .so  many  of  our 
public  men  in  the  time  of  Jefferson's  administration  as  to  the  e."^act  territory 
which  belonged  to  either  France  or  Spain. 

The  orders  for  the  surrender  of  Louisiana,  with  New  Orleans  and  the  island, 
were  not  issued  at  Versailles  until  April  21,  1764. 

By  reference  to  the  treat)'  it  will  be  observed  that  the  cession  to  Spain  merely 
refers  to  the  transfer  as  "the  country  known  under  the  name  of  Louisiana,  together 
witli  New  Orleans  and  the  i.sland  on  which  that  city  stands."  There  is  no 
other  description  or  designation.  Whether  Spain  claimed  Florida  west  to  the 
Iberville,  or  how  far  north  along  the  IMississippi,  and  north  of  the  thirty-first 
degree  of  latitude,  or  how  far  France  claimed  for  Louisiana  east  of  the  Iberville, 
or  anything  between  the  Mississippi  and  the  Florida  country — all  these  were  matters 
of  uncertainty  and  contention.  B\'  another  move  at  the  same  time  tliis  uncertainty 
was  attempted  to  be  cleared.  The  cession  to  Spain  of  Louisiana  was  accompanied, 
or,  it  should  more  properly  be  said,  was  followed,  by  the  adjustment  and  agreement 
known  in  history  as  tlie  Treaty  of  Paris,  which  was  concluded  February  10,  1763, 
between  Great  Britain  and  Portugal  on  the  one  part,  and  Spain  and  France  on  the 
other,  in  which  F'rance  ceded  to  Great  Britain  Nova  Scotia  (or  Acadia),  Canada 
with  all  its  dependencies,  tlie  island  of  Cape  Breton  and  also  all  the  other  islands 
and  coasts  on  the  Gulf  and  River  St.  Lawrence.  The  .same  treaty  further  fixed 
the  boundary  or  confines  between  the  British  and  French  po.ssessions  bv  a  "line 
drawn  along  the  middle  of  the  river  Mississippi,  from  its  source  to  the  river 
Iberville,  and  from  thence  by  a  Iinc<  drawn  along  the  middle  of  this  river,  and 
the  lakes  Maurepasand  Pontchartrain,  to  the  sea,"  and  then  the  treaty  makes  to 
Great  Britain  still  another  cession:  "the  river  and  port  of  Mobile,  and  every- 
thing which  he  possesses,  or  ought  to  possess,  on  the  left  side  of  the  river  Missis- 
sippi, except  the  town  of  New  Orleans  and  the  island  in  which  it  is  situated,  which 
shall  remain  to  France."  There  was  an  important  clause  in  the  treaty  which 
later  gave  rise  to  much  misunderstanding  wherein  it  was  "provided  that  the  uav- 
2239 2 


i8 


THK   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


igation  of  the  river  Mississippi  shall  be  equally  free,  as  well  to  the  subjects  of 
Great  Uritaiu  as  to  those  of  France,  in  its  whole  breadth  and  length,  from  its ' 
source  to  the  sea,  and  expressly  that  part  which  is  between  the  said  island  of  New 
Orleans  and  the  right  bank  of  that  river,  as  well  as  the  passage  both  in  and  out 
of  its  Uionth.  It  is  further  stipulated;  that  the  vessels  belonging  to  the  subjects  of 
either  nation  shall  noi  be  stopped,  visited  or  subjected  to  the  payment  of  any  duty 
whatever. ' ' 


LOUISIANA   A   TROUBLESOME   AND   EXPENSIVE   PROVINCE. 

Louisiana  had  been  a  source  of  infinite  trouble  and  expense  to  France.  From 
the  first  effort  at  coloiiization,  insubordination,  discord  and  malfeasance  among 
those  in  authority  continued  to  exist,  while  the  maintenance  of  troops  and  the 
expensive  contributicms  of  merchandise  constantly  made  to  the  Indian  tribes 
in  proximity  (who  demanded  such  supplies  as  a  condition  of  peace  with  the 
colonists  and  of  their  alliance  in  time  of  conflict  against  the  English),  were  all 
very  costly  to  the  home  government.  The  colony  had  proven  in  all  things  to  be 
very  unprofitable.  Crozat,  the  rich  and  calculating  merchant,  found  it  to  be  a  loss 
even  as  a  present,  and  he  gladly  relinquished  his  grant.  The  India  or  Law  Com- 
pany lost  twenty  millions  in  expensive  schemes  to  develop  a  commerce  under  its 
chartered  privileges.  It  is  conceded  that  the  French  government  squandered  over 
forty  millions  of  livres  in  colonization  efforts  in  Louisiana.  It  wa^  such  discour- 
agements as  made  France  willing  and  anxious  to  cede  to  Spain  all  her  interest  in 
such  possessions,  and  to  release  herself  from  the  further  obligation  oi  bearing  an 
increasing  financial  burden.  The  tnn'sfer  to  Spain  was  delayed  until  after  the 
jDortion  east  of  the  Mississippi  had  been  surrendered  to  the  English.  It  was  this 
delay  which  led  the  French  colonists  west  of  the  river  to  hope  that  they  would 
continue  to  remain  on  French  territory.  The  official  notice  of  Louis  XV,  dated 
April  21,  1764,  to  the  French  governor,  D'Abbadie,  and  received  in  October,  1764, 
to  deliver  possession  to  the  Spaniards,  dispelled  all  further  hope  of  the  colonists, 
and  they  submitted  with  indignation  and  humiliation.  It  was  not,  however,  until 
j\Iarch  5,  1766,  that  the  Spanish  governor,  Antonio  de  Ulloa,  with  two  companies 
of  infantry,  arrived  at  New  Orlean.s.  He  had  intended  to  defer  taking  complete 
possession  until  the  arrival  of  the  Spanish  troops.  He  met,  to  his  surprise,  a 
sullen  reception  from  the  citizens,  though  he  had  achieved  great  renown  before 
the  world.  He  was  an  eminent  scholar  and  writer,  and  a  famous  sailor,  having 
attained  the  grade  of  lieutenant-general  of  the  royal  navies  of  Spain.  Few  men 
at  the  time  of  his  death  had  contributed  so  nuich  to  the  general  knowledge  and 
scientific  advancement  of  a  nation  as  De  Ulloa.  The  knowledge  of  platina,  of 
electricity,  of  artificial  magnetism,  of  engraving  and  printing,  was  greatly  advanced 
by  the  researches  of  this  man.  He  was  al.so  a  great  promoter  of  astronomy.  In 
Spain  the  credit  is  given  him  of  having  discovered  the  secret  of  manufacturing 
superfine  cloth  by  a  combination  of  the  churla  wool  with  the  merino;  and  in 


w 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


19 


this  connection  lie  founded  at  Segovia,  in  Spain,  a  manufactory  where  cloths  of 
reniarkablf  fineness  were  produced.  He  was  a  benefactor  of  his  race  and  of  his 
time.  Looking  back  upon  that  remote  period  in  the  history  of  Louisiana  and 
upon  its  wild  and  undeveloped  .state,  we  may  well  marvel  that  one  so  famed 
among  his  countrymen  should  have  consented  to  so  exile  himself  as  to  become 
the  first  governor  under  Spani.sh  rule  of  that  distant  and  distracted  colony.  The 
inhabitants,  however,  could  not  forget  that  tliey  were  French,  and  they  resented 
the  act  of  cession  which  transferred  them  and  their  territory  to  another  flag  and 
another  nationality  without  their  acquiescence  and  in  defiance  of  their  repeated 
protests.  They  could  not  become  reconciled,  however  distinguished  and  excellent 
the  Spanish  governor  who  was  to  represent  the  changed  sovereignty.  The  discon- 
tent manifested  itself  at  first  in  assemblages  of  the  peojjle,  who  denounced  the 
treaty  of  cession.  This  was  followed  by  open  revolution.  Dc  Ulloa  was  forced 
to  seek  safety  in  the  Spanish  ship  which  lay  at  anchor  in  the  harbor.  The  limited 
military  force  was  powerless  to  protect  the  governor,  although  Aubry,  the  I'rench 
governor-general  of  the  colony  under  the  F'rench  authority,  exerted  every  influ- 
ence in  his  power  loyally  and  fearlessly  to  execute  the  mandate  of  his  sovereign — 
the  French  King — in  making  effective  the  cession  to  Spain.  Un  the  ist  of 
November,  1768,  De  LTlloa  and  his  family  repaired  to  a  French  vessel  which  he 
had  chartered,  and  amid  the  derisive  shouts  of  the  people  and  their  patriotic  songs 
he  sailed  away  from  the  town  of  New  Orleans.  The  French  governor  was  com- 
pelled to  order  back  a  force  of  the  French  colonist's  who  persisted  in  following  as 
far  as  the  French  fort  at  the  Balize,  there  to  oppose  any  vSpanisli  aid  entering  the 
river. 

Upon  Aubry's  threat  to  fire  upon  the  insurgents  following  De  Ulloa's  ship, 
they  desisted,  and  in  his  report  to  the  French  government  detailing  this  circum- 
stance, he  says:  "On  that  occasion  I  was  obeyed  for  the  first  time." 

The  people  attempted  to  vindicate  their  expulsion  of  De  Ulloa  with  various 
pretexts  detrimental  to  his  administration,  but  the  real  motive  is  too  plainly 
revealed  in  the  concluding  part  of  their  attempted  justification,  where  they  say: 
"What  harm  have  we  done  in  shaking  off"  a  foreign  yoke  which  was  made  still 
more  heavy  and  crushing  by  the  hand  which  imposed  it?  What  offense  have  we 
committed  in  claiming  back  our  laws,  our  country,  our  .sovereign,  and  in  conse- 
crating to  him  our  everlasting  love?"  They  appealed  to  the  King  to  annul  the 
cession  and  to  restore  to  them  I^'rench  sovereignty. 

The  weakness  of  France  which  prompted  the  cession  to  Spain  still  remained, 
however,  to  forbid  a  recession. 

The  Spanish  ministry  took  up  the  sedition  in  Louisiana.  But  one  minister 
advised  the  King  in  favor  of  receding  the  province  to  France.  The  council,  with 
this  exception,  while  admitting  the  antipathy  of  the  colonists  to  Spanish  rule,  and 
the  vast  expense  of  maintaining  local  government  with  no  corresponding  revenue 
to  follow,  held  that  for  State  policies  it  were  best  to  retain  the  cession.  The 
Mississippi  River  formed  a  line  of  demarcation  between  the  Spanish  and  the 


20 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


Enj^lisli  possessions.  Between  Louisiana  and  Mexico  there  intervened  a  vast 
space  within  which  another  power  niij^ht  encroach  by  extendinjj;^  its  frontier,  and 
thus  produce  incessant  controversy  with  Spain,  while  with  France  in  control  of 
Louisiana,  that  power  niijj;ht  in  time  extend  itself  toward  Mexico  and  open  up  an 
illicit  trade  with  that  country,  as  was  previously  done;  and  further,  in  the  event 
the  English  should  prevail  over  the  French,  it  might  be  to  the  interest  of  France, 
in  the  settlement  of  terms,  to  oflFer  Louisiana  to  the  English  nation,  which  would 
be  unfortunate  for  Spain  as  respects  her  Spanish  possessions  adjacent.  It  was 
therefore  determined  to  retain  tlie  cession,  and  while  reorganizing  the  local  gov- 
ernment upon  a  Spanish  foundation  it  was  proposed  to  visit  puni.shment  upon  the 
leaders  of  the  late  insurrection.  The  King  himself  expressed  a  firm  resolution  to 
recover  possession  and  to  repress  all  designs  against  his  authority  in  the  province. 
The  determination  of  the  government  was  made  painfully  manifest  to  the 
colonists  when,  on  July  24,  1769,  there  appeared  before  New  Orleans  a  formidable 
Spanish  fleet  of  24  sail  and  a  force  of  2,600  men,  under  the  command  of  General 
O'Reilly,  a  famous  commander,  who  had  been  selected  to  receive  formal  possession 
of  Louisiana  and  defend  the  Spanish  possession.  The  first  act  after  the  formal 
cession  was  the  arrest  and  trial  of  the  leaders  of  the  late  revolution.  They  were 
found  guilty  and  some  cruelly  condemned  to  death,  some  were  sentenced  to  ])er- 
petual  imprisonment  and  others  to  lesser  punishment,  while  as  to  all  confiscation 
of  property  was  adjudged. 

SPAIN  CEDES  FLORIDA  TO  GREAT  BRITAIN. 


By  another  section  of  the  treaty  of  1763,  Havana  and  the  whole  of  Cuba,  which 
then  belonged  to  Great  Britain,  were  restored  to  Spain,  and  in  return  therefor  Spain 
ceded  to  Great  Britain  "  Florida,  with  Fort  St.  Augustiu  and  the  bay  of  Pensacola, 
as  well  as  all  that  Spain  possesses  on  the  continent  of  North  America  to  the  east  or 
to  the  southeast  of  the  river  Mississippi." 

If  it  were  true  that  the  cession  to  Spain  of  "the  country  known  under  the 
name  of  Louisiana,"  contained  West  Florida,  or  any  portion  east  of  the  JVIissis- 
sippi  which  might  be  said  to  conflict  with  the  later  grant  from  France  to  Great 
Britain,  this  was  corrected  in  the  cession  by  Spain  to  Great  Britain  of  "all  that 
Spain  possesses  on  the  continent  of  North  America  to  the  east  of  or  to  the 
southeast  of  the  river  Missi.ssippi." 

To  this  point  we  find  England  claiming  possession  of  all  that  France  pos- 
sessed to  the  east  or  southeast  of  the  Mississippi  and,  also,  all  that  Spain  possessed 
and  claimed  eastward  of  that  river.  Spain  retained  pos.session  of  her  recent  cession 
from  France  of  the  territory  situated  west  of  the  Mississippi,  with  the  city  and 
island  of  New  Orleans.  Great  Britain  now  became  possessed  of  the  Florida  ter- 
ritory, whatever  that  was,  of  the  French  territory  on  the  river  and  port  of  Mobile 
and  all  that  remained  of  the  original  Louisiana  of  La  Salle's  claim  east  of  the 
Mississippi.     This  rounded  out  England's  posesssions.     The  Atlantic   was    the 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


21 


eastern  boundary,  the  Mississippi  the  western,  and  the  Gull"  the  southern,  with 
her  Canadian  possessions  on  the  north.  It  will  be  noticed  how  possession  fol- 
lowed accordin<^  to  the  law  of  discovery.  The  Spaniards  claimed  Florida  through 
the  Tampa,  Pensacola  and  St.  Au<>ustine  settlements  and  discoveries;  and  France 
claimed  the  country  drained  by  the  river  and  bay  of  ]\Iobile,  and  the  }>reater 
country  drained  by  the  Mississippi,  on  like  grounds. 

Much  confusion  exists  in  the  popular  mind  as  to  the  treaties  between  the 
Great  Powers  in  1762  and  1763.  First  in  order  was  the  single  and  complete  ces- 
sion of  "  the  whole  country  known  by  the  name  of  Louisiana,"  by  and  on  the 
part  of  the  King  of  France  to  the  King  of  Spain.  This  was  Noveml)er  3,  1762, 
and  is  known  in  history  as  the  "  F\imily  Compact,"  and  so  known  because  of  the 
agreement  between  the  two  monarchs  that  they  would  defend  each  other  in  their 
dominions  throughout  the  world,  and  would  regard  as  a  common  enemy  any  nation 
which  should  antagonize  either.  Second  in  order  was  the  treaty — about  three 
months  later — between  the  Kings  of  Great  Britain,  Portugal,  Spain  and  France, 
which  was  concluded  February  10,  1763,  known  as  the  Treaty  of  Paris  and  in 
which  the  King  of  France  cedes  "  everything  of  which  he  possesses  on  the  left 
side  of  the  river  Mississippi  "  to  Great  Britain.  Since,  in  all  the  claims  of  France 
previously  made,  the  country  of  Louisiana  was  understood  to  embrace  territory  on 
the  left  side  of  the  Mississippi,  as  well  as  on  the  right  side,  as  shown  in  the  grant 
to  Antoine  de  Crozat,  September  14,  1712,  by  Louis  XIV,  which  was  "bounded 
hy  the  English  Carol inas"  and  designated  as  a  part  of  "the  country  of  Louisiana," 
and  so  described  on  the  early  French  maps  and  by  French  explorers  and  French 
writers,  it  naturally  excites  surprise  that  in  the  face  of  the  cession  to  Spain  of  the 
"whole  country  known  as  Louisiana,"  there  should  also  be  ceded  a  part  of  that 
same  Louisiana  to  Great  Britain  a  few  months  later.  It  may  be  said  that  the 
treaty  of  November  3,  1762,  was  well  named  the  "  Secret  Treaty."  The  surprise 
is  the  greater  when  it  is  known  that  the  preliminaries  of  this  second  treaty  were 
actually  signed  on  the  same  day  as  that  ceding  "all  of  Louisiana  to  Spain." 


TALLEYRAND'S   EXPLANATION. 

That  we  may  also  have  before  us  the  justification  of  France  and  Spain  for 
such  evident  inconsistency,  if  not  deception,  it  may  be  of  interest  to  read  the 
letter  from  Talleyrand  to  General  Armstrong  after  the  cession,  and  thus  we  have 
both  sides  of  the  controversy  fairly  presented,  and  for  this  purpose  the  letter 
follows : 

r American  State  Papers  (foreiRii  relations),  vol.2, p. 635.     Letter  from  M.Talleyrand  to  General  Armstrong.] 

Pari.s,  December  21,  rSof. 

Sir:  I  had  the  honor,  in  Rniniaire  last,  to  inform  Mr.  Living.ston  that  I  would  .submit  to  the 
inspection  of  Ilis  Imperial  Majesty  the  letters  he  ad(lres.se<l  to  nie  relative  to  the  motives  of  ISIr. 
Monroe's  journey  to  Spain,  and  some  di.scussions  between  the  Court  of  Madrid  and  the  United  States. 

Among  the  observations  made  on  this  subject  by  Messrs.  Livingston  and  Monroe,  His  Imperial 
Majesty  has  been  obliged  to  give  particular  attention  to  those  bearing  on  the  discussions,  of  which  the 


I.V-"" 


22 


THE   LOUISIANA    PURCHASE. 


object  is  peculiarly  interesting  to  the  French  Government.  He  has  perceived  that  he  could  not  have 
been  a  stranger  to  the  examination  of  these  discussions,  since  they  grew  (mt  of  the  treaty  by  which 
I'raiice  had  ceiled  Louisiana  to  the  United  States;  and  His  Majesty  has  thought  that  an  explanation, 
made  with  that  fidelity  which  characterizes  him,  on  the  eastern  boundaries  of  the  ceded  territory, 
would  put  an  end  to  the  differences  to  which  this  cession  has  given  rise. 

Prance  in  giving  up  Louisiana  to  the  United  States,  transferred  to  tlieni  all  the  rights  over  that 
colony  which  she  had  acquired  from  vSpain;  .she  could  not,  nor  did  .she  wish  to,  cede  anj'  other;  and, 
that  no  room  might  be  left  for  doubt  in  this  respect,  she  repeated,  in  her  treaty  of  3otli  Aj)ril,  1X03,  the 
literal  expressions  of  the  treaty  of  St.  Ildefonso,  by  which  .she  had  acquired  that  colony  two  years  before. 

Now  it  was  stipulated,  in  her  treat\-  of  the  year  iSoi,  that  the  acquisition  of  Louisiana  by  France 
was  a  rctroccssioit;  that  is  to  saj-,  that  Spain  restored  to  I'rance  what  she  has  received  from  her  in 
1762.  At  that  period  she  had  received  the  territory  bounded  on  east  bj-  the  Mississippi,  the  river 
Iberville  and  the  lakes  Maurepas  and  Pontchartrain;  the  same  day  France  ceded  to  England,  by  the 
preliminaries  of  peace,  all  the  territory  to  the  eastward.  Of  this  Spain  had  received  no  part,  and  could, 
therefore  give  back  none  to  France. 

All  the  territory  lying  to  the  eastward  of  the  Mississippi  and  the  river  Iberville,  and  south  of  the 
32d  degree  of  north  latitude,  bears  the  name  of  Florida.  It  has  been  constantly  designated  in  that 
way  during  the  time  that  Spain  held  it ;  it  bears  the  .s:ime  name  in  the  treaties  of  limits  between  Spain 
and  the  United  States ;  and,  in  different  notes  of  Mr.  Livingston  of  a  later  date  than  the  treaty  of 
retrocession,  in  which  the  name  of  Louisiana  is  given  to  the  territory  on  the  west  .side  of  the  Mi.ssis.sippi ; 
of  Florida  to  that  on  the  east  of  it. 

According  to  this  designation,  thus  consecrated  by  time,  and  even  prior  to  the  period  when  .Spain 
began  to  possess  the  whole  territory  between  the  ^i.st  degree,  the  Missis.sippi,  and  the  .sea,  this  country 
ought,  in  good  faith  and  justice,  to  be  distinguished  from  Louisiana. 

Your  excellency  knows  that  before  the  preliminaries  of  1762,  confirmed  by  the  treaty  of  1763,  the 
French  possessions,  situated  near  the  Mi.ssissippi,  extended  as  far  from  the  east  of  this  river,  towards 
the  Ohio  and  the  Illinois,  as  in  the  quarters  of  Mobile  ;  and  you  nui.st  think  it  as  unnatural,  after  all 
the  changes  of  sovereignty  which  that  part  of  America  has  undergone,  to  give  the  name  of  Louisiana 
to  the  di.strict  of  ]Mobile,  as  to  the  territory  more  to  the  north,  on  the  same  bank  of  the  river,  which 
fonnerly  belonged  to  F'rance. 

These  ob.scrvations,  sir,  will  be  sufficient  to  dispel  every  kind  of  doubt,  with  regard  to  the  extent 
of  the  retrocession  made  by  vSpain  to  France,  in  the  month  of  Vendemiaire,  year  9.  It  was  under  this 
impression  that  the  I'rench  an<l  Spanish  plenipotentiaries  negotiated,  and  it  was  under  this  impression 
that  I  have  since  had  occasion  to  give  the  neces.s£iry  explanations  when  a  project  was  formed  to  take 
po.s.ses.sion  of  it.  I  have  laid  before  His  Imperial  Majesty  the  negotiations  of  Madrid  which  preceded 
the  treaty  of  1801,  and  His  Majesty  is  convinced  that,  during  the  whole  course  of  these  negotiations,  the 
Spanish  Government  has  con.stantly  refused  to  cede  any  part  of  the  Floridas,  even  from  the  Mississippi 
to  Mobile. 

His  Imperial  Majesty  has,  moreover,  authorized  me  to  declare  to  you,  that,  at  the  beginning  of 
the  year  1 1 ,  General  Bournonville  was  charged  to  open  a  new  negotiation  with  Spain  for  the  accptisition 
of  the  Floridas.  This  project,  which  has  not  been  followed  bj-  any  treaty,  is  an  evident  proof  that 
France  had  not  acquired,  by  the  treaty  retroceding  Louisiana,  the  country  east  of  the  Mississippi. 

The  candor  of  these  observations  proves  to  you,  sir,  how  much  value  His  ^Majesty  attaches  to  the 
maintenance  of  a  good  understanding  between  two  Powers,  to  whom  I'-rance  is  united  by  connexions 
so  intimate  and  so  numerous.  His  Majesty  called  upon  to  give  exi)lanations  on  a  (juestion  which 
interested  France  directly,  persuades  hitnself  that  thej-  will  leave  no  ground  of  misunderstanding 
between  the  United  States  and  Spain;  and  that  these  two  Powers,  animated,  as  they  ought  to  be,  bv 
sentiments  of  friendship  which  their  vicinity  and  their  po.sition  render  .so  necessary,  will  be  able  to 
agree  with  the  same  facility  on  the  other  subjects  of  their  discu.ssion. 

This  result  His  Imperial  Majesty  will  learn  with  real  interest.  He  saw  with  pain  the  United 
States  commence  their  differences  with  Spain  in  an  unusual  manner,  and  conduct  them.selves  towards 
the  Floridas  by  acts  of  violence  which  not  being  founded  in  right,  could  have  no  other  effect  but  to 
injure  its  lawful  owners.     *    *    * 

[  This  letter  not  quoted  infull.'\ 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


23 


THE  FLORIDAS  RETROCEDED  TO  SPAIN. 

Twenty  years  later  (on  September  3,  1783)  another  treaty  was  consutnniated 
in  which  Great  Britain  and  Spain  were  again  contracting  parties,  wherein  Great 
Britain,  in  consideration  for  an  exchange  of  the  Bahama  Islands,  owned  by  Spain, 
re-ceded  to  that  nation  East  and  West  Florida  ;  and  thus  for  the  second  time  Spain 
became  possessed  of  Florida.  Further  on  it  will  be  important  to  remember  that 
in  all  the  cessions  and  retrocessions  between  the  different  claimants  to  the  ]\Iissis- 
sippi  country,  Spain  acquired  from  France  no  interest  to  any  country  east  of  the 
Mississippi  and  the  island  and  city  of  New  Orleans.  What  Spain  acquired  in  that 
quarter  was  from  a  different  source  entirely.  It  is  also  well  to  remember  that 
France  had  disposed  of  all  her  possessions  on  both  sides  of  the  river.  She  con- 
veyed to  Spain  "all  the  country  known  under  the  name  of  Louisiana,  as  well  as 
New  Orleans  and  the  island  on  which  that  place  stands,"  and  conveyed  to  Britain 
all  her  possessions  "on  the  left  side  of  the  river  Mississippi,"  except  the  island 
and  city  of  New  Orleans.  If  Great  Britain  held  any  portion  of  Louisiana  under 
the  cession  from  Spain  of  West  Florida  (and,  under  Spain's  claim,  such  portion 
may  have  been  included),  then,  by  the  retrocession,  Spain  became  repossessed  of 
so  much  of  the  Louisiana  which  France  had  possessed. 


THE  UNITED  STATES  AND  SPAIN. 

The  war  of  our  revolution  coming  on,  and  the  colonies  having  succeeded 
against  Great  Britain,  the  United  States  now  appear  in  history  as  a  nation,  to 
contest  with  her  neighbors  for  adjustment  of  boundary  lines  which  before  were 
undetermined,  and  on  October  27,  1795,  a  treaty  was  entered  into  between  our 
nation  and  Spain  in  which  it  was  agreed  that  "  the  southern  boundary  of  the  United 
States,  which  divides  their  territory  from  the  Spanish  colonies  of  East  and  West 
Florida,  shall  be  designated  by  a  line  beginning  on  the  river  Mississippi  at  the 
northernmost  part  of  the  thirty-first  degree  of  latitude  north  of  the  equator,  which 
from  thence  shall  be  drawn  due  east  to  the  middle  of  the  river  Apalachicola  or 
Catahouchie;  thence  along  the  middle  thereof  to  its  junction  with  the  Flint; 
thence  straight  to  the  head  of  St.  ]\Iarys  river,  and  thence  down  the  middle 
thereof  to  the  Atlantic  Ocean." 

While  this  settled  how  far  north  Spain  might  extend  her  Florida  boundary, 
no  occasion  then  existed  for  determining  the  western  boundary,  as  Spain  owned 
on  both  sides  of  the  jMississippi.  What  was  claimed  as  West  Florida  became  a 
source  of  trouble  later  on.  Spain  and  the  United  States  were  now  the  only 
neighbors. 

AMERICAN    SETTLEMENTS. 

The  navigation  of  the  Mississippi.  —  By  gradual  advances  the  course  of 
American  empire  at  last  spread  as  far  westward  as  the  valley  of  the  Mississippi; 
and  by  various  treaties  with  foreign  nations  and  with  Indian  tribes,  the  supre- 


24 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHAvSK. 


iiiacy  of  the  infant  republic  had  already  reached  the  "father  of  waters."  Beyond 
was  Spanish  territory.  The  month  of  that  great  river  was  under  foreij^n  control. 
Spain  possessed  both  banks  at  that  point.  Our  line  of  settlements  depended 
upon  that  river  as  a  hi<:^h\vay  to  the  markets.  Their  products  must  pass  out 
throu<,di  the  mouth  of  the  Mississippi.  The  free  navif^atiou  of  this  river  was 
therefore  a  matter  of  vital  concern.  There  was  but  one  interest,  one  demand, 
one  hope  and  one  expression  on  the  part  of  every  American  in  that  portion  of  the 
extended  empire,  and  that  was  for  the  free  right  of  way  over  these  waters  from 
the  head  of  navigation  to  the  sea.  That  spirit  of  resistance  to  intervening 
obstacles,  coupled  with  love  of  right  and  freedom  which  characterized  the  builders 
of  our  nation,  and  which  went  with  the  advance  immigration  into  the  forest  wilds 
and  upon  the  desert  plains,  asserted  itself  in  the  valley  of  the  Mississippi  and 
demanded  a  free  outlet.  Whenever  this  right  had  been  granted  it  was  only  of  a 
temporary  nature,  and  even  then  permitted  with  reluctance  and  under  restriction. 
When,  therefore,  it  was  rumored  that  Spain  had  ceded  Louisiana  to  France,  fears 
were  at  once  aroused  lest  the  French  should  exercise  even  a  more  exclusive  and 
vigorous  policy  than  had  the  Spaniards,  from  whom,  by  the  treaty  of  October  27, 
1795,  a  right  was  secured  to  deposit  the  merchandise  and  effects  of  the  Americans 
at  New  Orleans  for  the  space  of  three  years,  and  at  the  end  of  that  period  the 
agreement  stipulated  that  "the  privilege  should  either  be  continued  at  New 
Orleans  or  an  equivalent  establishment  assigned  on  another  part  of  the  banks  of 
the  Mississippi."  Even  after  the  lapse  of  the  three  years  a  tacit  permission 
continued.  The  Spaniards  declined  to  believe  the  reported  cession  of  the  province 
to  France,  but  resolved  if  it  were  true  not  to  relinquish  their  authority  without 
protest. 

Following  this  came  the  announcement  that  the  Spanish  intendant  had 
proclaimed  that  the  right  of  deposit  no  longer  existed.  This  produced  an 
outburst  of  intense  indignation  from  the  Americans,  and  remonstrance  came  from 
the  settlers  and  planters  on  lands  tributary  to  the  IMississippi.  It  was  at  once 
assumed  that  the  Spanish  revocation  was  a  result  of  the  cession  to  France,  and, 
further,  that  it  was  secretly  prompted  in  advance  by  the  latter  power.  This 
nattirally  made  the  cession  to  France  the  niore  obnoxious.  Angry  and  excited 
appeals  and  urgent  petitions  were  addressed  to  Congress.  The  conclusion  was 
everywhere  irresistible  that  a  policy  of  exclusion  was  to  be  the  order  which 
would  mean  the  extinction  of  American  commerce  and  navigation  rights  along 
the  Mississippi  and  the  abandonment  of  flourishing  communities  already  estab- 
lished there.  Th  it  feeling  so  inherent  in  the  American  breast  of  resistance  to 
arbitrary  power  began  to  assert  itself.  "The  Mississippi  is  ours  by  the  law  of 
nature,"  the  inhabitants  proclaimed.  Proceeding  still  further  they  threatened 
in  their  remonstrance:  "If  Congress  refuses  us  effectual  protection,  if  it  forsakes 
us,  we  will  adopt  the  measures  which  our  safety  requires,  even  if  they  endanger 
the  peace  of  the  Union  and  our  connection  with  the  other  States.  No  protection, 
no  allegiance." 


THE   LOUIvSIANA   PURCHASE. 


25 


POPr  I,A  R     DISCONTENT. 

The  people  in  the  older  States  alonjj^  the  Atlantic  seaboard  canjrht  np  the  cry 
from  their  relatives  and  fellow-eonntrynien  on  the  then  distant  frontiers  of  Ohio, 
Kentucky,  Tennessee  and  Indiana,  and  emphasized  the  demand  on  Conj^^ress  and 
on  the  President  for  relief  throuj^h  ne<;otiation,  or,  if  that  failed,  by  war.  It  became 
a  party  issnc.  President  Jefferson  foresaw  the  <,n-()win<r  discontent,  and  endeav- 
ored to  allay  the  excitement  by  assurance  of  every  possible  effort  on  his  part  as  the 
nation's  Executive.  He  transmitted  to  Conj^ress,  December  22,  1802,  a  message 
in  which  he  said  "that  he  was  aware  of  the  obligation  to  maintain  in  all  cases 
the  rights  of  the  nation,  and  to  employ  for  that  purjxise  those  just  and  honorable 
means  which  belong  to  the  character  of  the  United  vStates. "  In  a  reply  from  the 
House  of  Representatives,  that  body  reminded  the  President  that  they  held  it  to 
be  their  duty  "to  express  their  unalterable  determination  to  maintain  the  bound- 
aries and  the  rights  of  navigation  and  conunerce  through  the  river  .Mississippi  as 
established  by  existing  treaties." 

ATTEMPTS  TO  SECURE   COMMERCIAL   PRIVILEGE.S. 

The  President  in  the  meanwhile  had  been  active.  Through  Charles  Pinck- 
ney,  the  minister  of  the  United  States  to  ]\Iadrid,  he  offered  to  purchase  of  Spain 
that  nation's  possessions  on  the  east  side  of  the  Mississippi,  and  as  a  further 
inducement,  and  in  the  event  of  purchase,  the  United  States  offered  to  guarantee 
the  Spanish  dominions  beyond  the  Mississippi.  Jefferson  instructed  Pinckney  to 
say  to  the  Spanish  monarch  : 

Tlie  anxiety  of  our  Govfrniiient  on  the  subject  of  possessing  the  territorj-  on  the  east  side  of  the 
Mississippi,  the  importance  of  this  acquisition  to  them  for  the  purpose  of  securing  to  the  citizens  of 
one-half  of  the  United  States  the  certain  means  of  exporting  their  products,  *  *  "  feel  them- 
selves every  day  more  convinced  of  their  having  a  permanent  establishment  on  the  Mississippi,  con- 
venient for  the  purposes  of  navigation,  and  belonging  solely  to  them. 

The  Spanish  Government  declined  this  offer,  and  even  refused  the  further 
request  that  a  mercantile  agent  of  the  United  States  be  permitted  to  reside  at 
New  Orleans,  the  answer  being:  "That  by  making  one  example  of  that  kind 
the  door  would  be  opened  for  like  demands  on  the  part  of  other  nations."  This 
refusal  was  dated  April  7,  1802,  more  than  one  year  and  a  half  after  the  secret 
treat)'  ceding  Louisiana  with  New  Orleans  to  France  (October  i,  1800).  Though 
Mr.  Pinckney  was  at  the  court  of  Spain,  and  diplomatic  correspondence  had 
passed  between  him  and  that  court  as  to  our  anxiety  concerning  the  free  naviga- 
tion of  the  Mississippi,  yet  the  cession  to  France  was  not  even  hinted  to  him,  and 
he,  as  well  as  Mr.  Jefferson,  still  supposed  Spain  to  own  both  sides  of  that  river 
at  its  mouth. 


I 


26 


THE   LOUISIANA   I'URCHA.SE. 


SPAIN    RETROCEDES    TO    FRANCE. 

The  next  important  cliangc  in  the  relations  of  Louisiana  was  in  the  retro- 
cession from  Spain  to  France  in  the  treaty  known  as  the  "treaty  of  San  Ildcfonso," 
October  i,  1800.  vSpain  had  held  possession  for  thirty-eijjht  years.  The  Duke  of 
Parma,  a  son-in-law  of  the  ''injjf  of  Spain,  was  desirous  of  sccurinjj^  for  himself 
the  succession  to  tht  Cirand  Ducliy  of  Tuscany,  that  he  should  be  raised  to  the 
dignity  of  a  kinjj  aiu.  have  his  dominions  enlarged  by  the  addition  of  Tuscany. 
In  consideration  of  France  giving  assuraiices  for  these  distinctions  and  enlarged 
territory  in  Italy,  Spain  agreed  to  cede  Louisiana. 

The  action  of  Spain  was  as  great  a  surprise  as  it  was  a  disajipointment  to  the 
people  of  the  United  States.  Jefferson  voiced  the  popular  sentiment  when,  on 
December  15,  1802,  he  said  to  Congress:  "The  cession  of  the  Spanish  province 
of  Louisiana  to  France,  which  took  place  in  the  course  of  the  late  war,  will,  if 
carried  into  effect,  make  a  change  in  the  aspect  of  our  foreign  relations."  Our 
recent  communications  with  France  had  not  been  of  a  pleasant  character. 

Our  shipping  upon  the  high  seas  had  for  some  time  been  exposed  to  unex- 
pected depredations  by  French  cruisers.  Protest  after  protest  had  been  made  to 
the  French  government,  and  various  offers  for  amicable  terms  proposed,  but  with- 
out avail.  Washington  had  frequent  occasion  to  complain,  and  this  condition 
continued  into  the  administration  of  President  John  Adams,  who  sent  an  embassy 
to  France  in  1798  to  adjust  the  differences  between  the  two  nations.  The  French 
Directory  added  insult  to  injury  by  refusing  to  give  audience  to  the  embassy. 
Assurances  were  finally  given  that  upon  payment  of  a  liberal  sum  to  the  Fre'.ich 
government  and  a  gratuity  of  a  quarter  of  a  million  dollars  to  Talleyrand — who 
was  one  of  the  Director}- — the  Americans  would  be  heard.  It  was  in  reply  to  this 
shameful  demand  that  Charles  Cotesworth  Pinckney,  one  of  the  emba.ssy,  made 
that  memorable  answer:  "^Millions  for  defense,  but  not  one  cent  for  tribute,"  and 
with  his  colleagues,  John  Marshall  and  Elbridge  Gerry,  returned  to  their  own 
country.  This  outrage  was  met  by  Adams  in  preparations  for  war,  and  Washing- 
ton, then  in  retirement  at  Mount  Vernon,  was  requested  by  the  President  to  take 
command  of  our  armies.  He  accepted,  and  chose  his  friend  Alexander  Hamilton 
as  his  second  in  command.  The  promptness  and  determination  of  our  nation  to 
resent  the  long-suffered  abuses  upon  our  commerce  and  the  personal  indignities 
offered  our  accredited  diplomatic  representatives,  aroused  the  French  to  a  realiza- 
tion that  we  would  give  them  war,  unless  they  should  give  us  fair  dealing.  They 
chose  the  latter  alternative  and  terms  were  agreed  upon,  but  not  until  the  accession 
to  power  of  the  astute  First  Consul,  who  clearly  foiesaw  the  complications  which 
his  predecessors  in  authority  had  invited  as  to  us  and  as  to  other  nations  with 
which  France  was  destined  to  engage  in  very  costly  and  unprofitable  wars. 

This  episode  in  the  dismissal  of  Pinckney,  Marshall  and  Gerry,  our  three 
special  env'oys,  which  led  to  the  suspension  of  our  commercial  intercourse  with 
France,  when  added  to  the  well-known  reputation  of  Napoleon  for  aggressive 
demands  among  those  who  were  his  neighbors,  made  any  closer  relations  at  that 


THK    LOUISIANA    I'URCHASK. 


27 


time  willi  him  or  his  nation  f.\CfC(linj,rly  distastcfnl.      Mr.  JclTcrson  i^rcRTrtd  that 
Spain  should  bt-  our  neighbor  rather  than  I-'ranct.'. 

The  specific  words  of  the  retrocession  are  as  follows  : 

His  Cfltluilii-  Maji'sty  ])n)iiiisi.'s  and  i'iij,'a>(fs  on  his  part  to  retrocede  to  tlu-  I'ri'ni-li  Kcpulilic 
■*  *  *  the  colony  or  provincf  of  I.onisiana  with  thi'  same  <.'Xteiit  it  now  has  in  tlu'  hands  of  S|)ain, 
and  that  it  ha<i  when  I'ratice  pfissessi-d  it,  and  snch  as  it  should  be  after  the  treaty  suhseijuently 
entered  into  between  Spain  and  other  States. 

The  actual  existence  of  the  retrocession  now  beiuff  known  it  only  increased 
the  previous  ill  feelinjj;^  occasioned  by  the  mere  rumor.  The  exact  text  of  the 
treaty  of  Ildefonso,  however,  was  unknown  until  published  in  the  Memoir  by 
I)e  Onis  in  1820.  To  what  extent  did  France  recover  po.ssession  of  Louisiana  as 
it  fcjrnierly  belonjjjed  to  her?     This  was  the  question. 

To  still  more  complicate  the  situation,  war  between  France  and  Ivn<:^land  was 
about  to  become  an  assured  fact.  It  was  therefore  determined  at  once  to  press 
nco;otiations  upon  France  for  terms.  The  exijj;ency  .seemed  to  require  the  best  efH^rt 
and  the  best  talent,  and,  to  that  end,  James  Monroe  was  selected  to  cooperate  with 
Mr.  lyivinjrston,  our  minister  to  Napoleon's  court.  In  addition  to  Mr.  Monroe's 
hijfh  qualifications  he  was  specially  recommended  because  of  his  previous  attitude, 
while  a  Member  of  Conjfre.ss  from  Virj^inia,  in  as.sertinjr  the  riorhts  of  the  western 
people  to  the  naviijation  of  their  jjreat  river.  It  became  very  evident  to  Mr. 
Jefferson  that  unless  a  favorable  result  was  secured  through  nej^otiation  a  resort 
must  be  had  to  war,  and  he  even  went  so  far  as  to  instruct  our  ministers  to  consult 
with  England  with  a  view  to  an  alliance  against  I* ranee.  His  language  to  Minister 
Livingston  is  significant: 

The  day  that  France  takes  possession  of  New  Orleans  fixes  the  sentence  which  is  to  restrain  her 
forever  within  hei  l"v,  -.vatei  ..lark.  It  seals  the  union  of  two  nations  who  in  conjunction  can  maintain 
exclusive  possession  of  the  ocean.  I'roni  that  moment  we  must  marry  ourselves  to  the  Hritish  lit  et 
and  nation.  *  *  *  This  is  not  a  state  we  seek  or  desire.  It  is  one  which  this  measure,  if  adojited 
by  Trance,  forces  on  us  as  necessarily  as  any  other  cause,  by  the  laws  of  nature,  hrinj^s  on  its  necessary 
effect. 

The  anxiety  and  deep  feeling  which  pos.sessed  ]Mr.  Jefferson  can  be  seen  in 
the  hurried  note  which  he  addressed  to  IVIr.  Monroe : 

I  have  but  a  moment  to  inform  you  that  the  fever  into  which  the  western  mind  is  thrown  by  the 
affair  at  New  Orleans,  stimulated  by  the  mercantile  and  jjenerally  the  federal  interest,  threatens  to 
overbear  our  peace.     *     *     * 

I  shall  to-morrow  nominate  you  to  the  Senate  for  an  extraordinary  mission  to  France.  *  *  * 
In  the  meantime  pray  work  night  and  day  to  arrange  your  affairs  for  a  temjiorary  absence,  perhaps 
for  a  long  one.     *     *     * 

A  few  days  later  he  again  wrote  him,  saying: 

The  agitation  of  the  public  mind  on  occasion  of  the  late  suspension  of  our  rights  of  deposit  at 
New  Orleans  is  extreme.  *  *  ■*  Remonstrances,  memorials,  etc.,  are  now  circulating  through  the 
whole  of  the  country,  and  signing  by  the  body  of  the  people.  The  measures  which  we  have  been 
pursuing,  being  invisible,  do  not  satisfy  their  minds ;  something  sensible,  therefore,  ha;i  become 
necessary,  and,  indeeil,  our  object  of  purchasing  New  Orleans  and  the  Floridas  is  a  measure  likely  to 
assume  so  many  shapes  that  no  instructions  could  be  squared  to  fit  them. 


a8 


TIIK    LOUISIANA    PURCHASE. 


NFAV  ORI.KANS   A*I)    I'l.ORIDA    ARK   DKMAN'DKD. 

Here  we  observe  the  first  distinct  demand  on  the  part  of  our  people.  To  have 
asked  more  wonld  have  been  extremely  un])()i)nlar  at  that  time.  Napoleon,  wiio 
was  now  confntntid  with  the  certainty  of  a  j^i^anlic  war  with  Kn^rland,  well  knew 
that  colonies  far  distant  across  the  seas  mnst  be  protected  by  snflicient  naval  forces 
and  at  j^reat  cost.  England  was  then  a  j^reat  naval  j)ower  while  I'rance  was  far 
inferior.  The  recent  French  losses  in  .San  Dominj^o,  with  the  proximity  to 
Lonisiana  of  the  liritish  naval  armaments  in  that  ((uartcr,  with  well-etpiijiped 
j>;arrisons  in  Jamaica  and  the  Windward  Islands,  required  but  little  reflection  for 
an  astute  mind  like  that  of  Xapoleon  to  snjj^jrest  tlie  most  disastrous  con.seqnences 
if  immediate  action  by  him  should  not  be  adopted  as  to  Louisiana.  He  was  not 
lonj;  in  arrivinjf  at  a  conclusion.  Summoning  two  of  his  counsellors  to  him,  and 
in  a  very  imi)assioned  manner,  he  disclosed  to  them  his  purp(jse  with  rej^ard  to 
Louisiana.      He  said  : 

They  (the  Ivnglish)  slmll  not  have  the  Mississippi,  which  they  covet.  *  *  *  The  conquest  of 
Loiiisiiina  would  hv  easy  if  they  only  took  the  troulile  to  make  a  (lescont  thire.  I  have  not  a  moment 
to  lose  in  puttinj{  it  out  of  their  reach.  *  *  *  i  think  of  ceding;  it  to  the  I'nited  .States.  "*  *  * 
They  only  ask  of  me  one  town  in  Louisiana,  but  I  already  consider  the  colony  as  entirely  lost;  and  it 
appears  to  me  that  in  the  hands  of  this  jjrowinj;  power  it  will  he  more  useful  to  the  policy,  and  even 
to  the  commerce,  of  I'rance,  than  if  I  should  attempt  to  keep  it. 


NAPOLKON   OKKKR.S  TO  CKDK   AM,  OF   LOl'ISIANA. 

The  two  counsellors  disajrreed,  one  approvinf^  the  course  proposed  and  the 
other  decidedly  opposinjj^  it.  To  the  first  one  Napoleon  communicated  his  final 
resolution,  sayinj^^ : 

It  is  not  only  New  Orleans  that  I  will  cede,  it  is  the  whole  colony  without  any  reservation. 
*  *  *  To  attempt  to  retain  it  would  be  folly.  I  direct  you  to  ne).(Otiate  this  offer  with  the  envoys 
of  the  United  States.  *  *  *  i  will  be  moderate  in  consideration  of  the  necessity  in  which  I  am 
of  niakin>{  a  sale.     But  keep  this  to  yourself. 

It  was  Napoleon's  belief  that  Monroe  was  clothed  with  instructions  more 
extensive  than  the  assumed  authorization  of  Congress  would  warrant,  both  as  to 
territory  and  as  to  price.  In  this  he  was  mistaken.  The  instructions  to  our  envoys 
were  to  "procure  *  *  *  ^  cession  to  the  United  States  of  New  Orleans  and 
of  West  and  East  Florida,  or  as  much  thereof  as  the  actual  proprietor  can  be 
prevailed  on  to  part  with." 

It  was  also  required  that  ' '  the  navigation  of  the  river  Mississippi,  in  its  whole 
breadth  from  its  source  to  the  ocean  and  in  all  its  passages  to  and  from  the  same, 
shall  be  equally  free  and  common  to  citizens  of  the  United  States  and  of  the 
French  Republic."  It  was  suggested  that  if  France  declined  to  cede  to  us  the 
whole  of  the  island  of  Orleans  then  a  part  should  be  sought  for,  if  no  more  than 
space  enough  upon  which  to  establish  a  large  commercial  town  on  the  bank  of  the 
river;  or  if  unable  to  procure  a  complete  jurisdiction  over  any  convenient  spot 


Thomas  Jefferson  in  1803,  *t  thp  age  of  eo. 


By  permission  of  McClure's  Magazine 


Barbe  Marbois. 


By  pe-miss.on  of  Ihe  Cosmopolitan  Magajmo, 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


29 


whatever,  the  envoys  were  instructed  to  secure  a  right  of  deposit  with  the 
privilege  of  holding  real  estate  for  commercial  purposes.  If  the  F'loridas  could 
not  be  secured  the  envoys  were  to  seek  for  suitable  deposits  at  the  mouths  of  the 
rivers  passing  from  the  United  States  through  the  Ploridas,  as  well  as  their  free 
navigation. 

TWO   PROMIXHNT   ACTOR.S. 

There  are  two  eminent  persons  in  history  to  whose  utterances  at  this  distant 
day  we  can  refer  with  confidence  for  authoritative  information  as  to  the  details  of 
the  negotiations  for,  and  as  to  what  was  included  in,  the  Louisiana  cession,  and 
these  are  Marbois  and  Jefferson — the  one  of  France,  the  other  of  America ;  the 
one,  who  was  Napoleon's  negotiator,  in  selling;  the  other,  who  was  our  President, 
in  buying  lyouisiana.  These  men,  as  the  noted  representatives  of  the  two  countries 
in  this  transaction,  may  well  be  depended  on  to  convey  to  us  the  most  accurate 
information  touching  the  cession  in  all  its  phases. 

Marquis  de  Marbois  had  a  most  intimate  personal  knowledge  of  our  country 
and  had  contributed  valuable  aid  in  our  revolutionary  struggle.  He  was  also  a 
diplomat  of  wide  experience,  having  served  in  1769  as  secretar\-  of  the  French 
legation  to  the  diet  of  the  Empire,  which  held  its  sittings  at  Ratisbon  ;  later  he 
served  in  the  same  character  at  Dresden,  and  was  charge  d'affaires  at  Bavaria,  and 
was  afterwards  elected  counsellor  of  the  parliament  of  IMetz.  In  1779  he  was  made 
secretary  of  the  French  legation  and  while  here  married  an  American,  a  resident  of 
Philadelphia  ;  at  all  times  he  was  a  most  devoted  friend  of  our  Republic.  On  his 
return  to  France  his  active  temperament  soon  brought  him  in  contact  with  the 
varying  changes  of  government  at  that  time.  He  suffered  imprisonment,  ostracism, 
and  exile  at  some  periods,  while  at  others  he  enjoyed  the  most  distinguished  honors. 
During  the  reign  of  terror  he  was  imprisoned,  and  recovered  his  liberty  only  with 
the  fall  of  Robespierre.  When  Napoleon  became  First  Consul  he  treated  Marbois 
with  marked  favor,  and  in  1801  made  him  minister  of  the  public  treasury. 
During  the  negotiations  for  the  cession  of  the  Louisiana  territory  he  was  selected 
by  Napoleon  as  plenipotentiary  on  the  part  of  the  French  Republic.  So  grave  a 
matter  should  properly  have  been  intrusted  to  Talleyrand,  but  Mr.  Monroe,  in  his 
memoirs  tells  us  that  Napoleon,  addressing  Marbois,  said,  "That  being  an  affair 
of  the  treasury,  I  will  commit  it  to  you."  It  is,  however,  asserted  that  this  wu.: 
not  the  real  motive  for  intrusting  this  negotiation  to  Marbois,  but  was  done  because 
Napoleon  had  greater  confidence  in  his  integrity  than  he  had  in  Talleyrand's. 

The  following  extract  from  a  letter  from  Livingston  to  Madison,  of  April  13, 
1803,  may  here  be  of  interest,  as  it  refers  to  M.  Marbois,  who  related  to  Livingston 
an  interview  that  he  had  with  the  First  Consul : 

He  ( Marbois )  then  took  occasion  to  mention  his  sorrow  that  any  cause  of  difference  sliould  exist 
between  our  countries.  The  Consul  told  him,  in  reply,  "Well,  you  have  the  charge  of  the  treasury; 
let  them  give  you  one  hundred  million  of  Francs,  and  pay  their  own  claims,  and  take  the  whole 
country."  Seeing  by  my  looks  that  I  was  surprised  at  .so  extravagant  a  demand,  he  added  that  he  con- 
sidered the  demand  as  exorbitant,  and  had  told  the  First  Consul  that  the  thing  was  impossible;  that 


30  THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 

we  had  not  the  means  of  raisinjtf  that.  The  Consul  told  him  we  might  borrow  it.  I  now  plainly  saw 
the  whole  business:  first,  the  Consul  was  disposed  to  sell;  next,  he  distrusted  Talleyrand,  on  account 
of  the  business  of  the  supposed  intention  to  bribe,  and  meant  to  put  the  negotiation  into  the  hands 
of  Marbois,  whose  character  for  integrity  is  established.  (See  American  State  Papers,  I'oreitrn  Rela- 
tions, vol.  2,  p.  55,^. ) 

Whether  this  be  true  or  otherwise,  it  is  certain  that  our  negotiators  had  great 
admiration  for  Marbois,  as  Monroe,  in  referring  to  the  success  obtained,  says: 

I  add  with  pleasure  that  the  conduct  of  M.  Marbois,  in  every  stage  of  the  negotiations,  was 
liberal,  candid  and  fair,  indicating  a  very  friendly  feeling  for  the  United  States  and  a  strong  desire  to 
preserve  the  most  amicable  relations  between  the  two  couiitries. 

THE  A.MERICAN    NEGOTIATORS. 

At  this  time  Robert  R.  Livingston  was  the  American  minister  to  Paris.  He 
had  been  judge  of  the  admiralty  court,  a  justice  of  the  New  York  supreme  court, 
and  a  memljer  of  the  stamp  act  Congress  in  1765.  He  was  a  delegate  to  the 
Continental  Congress,  where  he  was  chosen  one  of  a  committee  of  five  to  draft 
the  Declaration  of  Independence.  He  was  appointed  the  first  chancellor  of  New 
York  and  as  such  administered  the  oath  of  office  to  (xeorge  Washington  on  his 
inauguration  as  first  President  of  the  United  States.  He  was  Secretary  of  P\)reigu 
Affairs  for  the  United  States  from  1781  to  1783.  In  1801  he  resigned  the  chan- 
cellorship and  accepted  the  mission  to  France. 

James  Monroe,  as  before  mentioned,  was  also  appointed  to  aid  in  the  negotia- 
tions, and  was  named  as  minister  extraordinary.  His  life  had  been  an  eventful 
one.  H(.  joined  the  army  in  the  revolution  at  the  headqiuirters  of  Washington 
in  New  York  as  a  lieutenant  ;  was  with  the  troops  at  Harlem,  White  Plains  and 
Trenton  ;  he  also  took  part  in  the  battles  of  Brand\wine,  Germautown  and 
Monmouth.  He  was  a  Representative  in  the  Fourth,  Fifth  and  Sixth  Congresses 
of  the  Confederation;  was  elected  a  United  States  Senator  from  \'irginia  in  1790, 
and  held  the  office  for  four  )-ears,  when  he  was  sent  as  envoy  to  France.  He  was 
governor  of  Virginia  from  1799  to  1802.  After  Jefferson's  election  to  the  Presi- 
dencv  he  was  returned  to  the  French  mission  from  which  a  few  years  before  he 
had  been  recalled.  From  Paris  he  went  to  London  as  the  accredited  representa- 
tive of  the  United  States  to  the  Court  of  St.  James.  After  his  return  he  was 
chosen  for  the  second  time  governor  of  Virginia,  and  afterwards  became  Secretary 
of  State  under  President  Madison.  In  1814-15  he  acted  as  ^Secretary  of  War. 
In  1816,  at  the  age  of  59,  he  was  elected  President  of  the  United  States,  and  was 
reelected  in  182 1  with  almost  complete  unanimity.  Under  his  administration 
much  important  legislation  was  enacted  ;  he  became  conspicuous  in  his  resist- 
ance to  foreign  interference  in  American  affairs,  and  his  name  has  become 
associated  with  the  policy  ever  since  known  as  the  Monroe  Doctrine,  which  now 
has  the  force  of  international  law.  His  appointment  to  Paris  at  this  particular 
time  was  a  very  popular  one,  especially  in  view  of  the  well-known  record  he  had 
made  in  advocacy  of  the  American  claim  to  the  free  navigation  of  the  Mississippi 


Robert  R.  Livingston. 


,i 


1 


I 


President  Monroe. 


By  permission  of  the  Cosmopolitan  Magazine. 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


31 


river.  Much  was  expected  of  him,  and  well  this  confidence  was  repaid  as  tlie 
result  testified.  His  splendid  service  in  the  achievement  accomplished  was  in 
aftrr  years  remembered,  when  he  was  elected  to  the  Chief  Ma<i;istracy  of  the  nation. 

These  were  the  eminent  Americans  who  were  to  arranj^e  the  terms  of  purchase 
with  the  French  nej^otiator.  All  had  been  intimate  before  and  had  contributed 
mutual  aid  in  the  establishment  of  our  Republic.  lyiviufjstcm,  Monroe  and 
Marbois  now  met  on  the  shores  of  another  nation  as  envoys  of  two  different 
countries,  and  thou»(h  friends  were  yet  loyal  to  the  conflictinjj;'  interests  and  to 
the  opposite  sovereij^nties  which  they  respectively  represented. 

So  great  an  acquisition  as  the  Louisiana  territory  was  never  contemplated 
when  these  envoys  entered  upon  their  duties.  Such  thoughts  were  never  enter- 
tained by  Jefferson,  Madison,  Monroe  or  Livingston.  It  was  nowhere  discussed 
in  our  nation.  For  the  Floridas  and  for  New  Orleans  our  envoys  were  authorized 
to  offer  $2,000,000.  Jefferson  feared  to  the  last  moment  that  even  the  least  of  his 
proposals  would  be  rejected  by  F"" ranee.  While  Livingston,  the  American  minister 
at  Paris,  was  exceedingly  nervous  and  never  confident;  various  efforts  were  made 
by  him  before  Monroe's  arrival  to  reach  some  terms.  When  Talleyrand  met  Liv- 
ingston, after  the  stormy  interview  between  himself.  Napoleon  and  ]\Iarb()is,  he 
astounded  him  when  he  very  abruptly  inquired,  "Wliat  will  you  give  for  the 
whole?"  So  unexpected  was  this,  it  was  difficult  for  him  to  make  reply.  The 
following  day  he  summoned  courage  to  follow  up  this  advantage ;  approaching 
Talleyrand  on  the  proposition  for  the  cession  of  the  whole  of  Louisiana,  Talley- 
rand explained  that  the  suggestion  was  only  personal  from  himself.  Livingston, 
writing  to  Madison  at  the  time  of  this  interview,  says:  "He  (Talleyrand)  told 
me  he  would  answer  my  note,  but  that  he  must  do  it  evasively,  because  Loui- 
siana was  not  theirs."  This  only  made  Livingston  thereafter  the  more  suspicious 
and  led  him  strongly  to  believe  that  the  delays  were  intended  only  to  gain  time. 
Even  when  Marl)ois  seriously  submitted  to  him  a  like  proposition  he  hesitated 
to  confide  in  his  good  faith.  He  also  realized  that  he  was  without  authority  to 
entertain  such  an  enlarged  scheme,  however  sincerely  offered.  While  the  true 
condition  remained  unknown  to  him,  and  while  he  was  still  suffering  the  greatest 
distrust  of  his  surroundings,  Monroe  arri\-ed;  at  his  first  meeting  with  his  col- 
league, Livingston  said  to  him.  "Only  force  can  give  us  New  Orleans.  We 
must  employ  force.  Let  us  first  get  possession  of  the  country  and  negotiate 
afterwards."  A  conference  on  the  following  day  with  Marbois  soon  convinced 
Monroe  of  the  victory  which  was  close  at  hand.  Marbois,  being  delighted  to 
meet  his  old  friend  of  the  revolutionary  days,  frankly  confided  to  him  the  conclu- 
sion of  Napoleon  with  a  reliable  statement  of  the  motives  for  the  same.  The 
overtures  by  Marbois  were  received  with  surprise  and  delight.  It  was  impossible 
to  realize  the  magnitude  of  the  prize.  As  Marbois  in  after  years  so  well  says  in 
his  writings : 

Instead  of  the  cession  of  a  town  and  its  inconsiderable  territory  a  vast  portion  of  America  was 
in  some  sort  offered  to  the  United  States.  They  only  asked  for  the  mere  right  of  navigating  the 
Mississippi,  and  their  sovereignty  was  about  to  be  extended  over  the  largest  rivers  of  the  world. 


33 


THE    LOriSIANA    PURCHASE. 


LOUISIANA  CEDED  TO  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

The  American  envoys  conld  nut  consult  the  lionie  }j[ovcrnnicnt  for  fnrtlier 
instructions.  The  distance  was  <^reat  and  time  was  precious.  War  was  soon  to 
be  declared  between  Hnj^land  and  France.  Prompt  action  was  necessary.  Quick- 
ness in  action  meant  the  vast  domain  west  of  the  Missi.ssippi  for  our  Republic,  as 
delay  in  action  would  mean  it  for  lMi<;land.  Our  nej^otiators  read  the  future  with 
the  alternative  before  them,  and  they  j^ladly  acce]itcd  the  issue,  and  soon  there 
was  an  ajjjreement  for  the  cession  of  the  whole  of  Louisiana.  It  was  Marbois  who 
submitted  the  draft  which  contained  this  clause: 

The  colony  or  province  of  Louisiana  is  ceiled  by  I'rance  to  the  United  .States,  with  all  its  rights 
and  appurtenances,  as  fully  and  in  the  same  niainier  as  they  have  heeii  ac{|uired  by  the  I'reneh  Re])u1)- 
lie,  by  virtue  of  the  third  article  of  the  treaty  concluded  with  His  Catholic  Majesty  at  St.  Ildei)honso 
on  the  1st  of  October,  icSoo. 

This  lano;ua}jfe  was  subsequently  chanj>;ed  and  when  made  a  part  t)f  the  final 
treaty  the  clause  was  as  follows  : 

Art.  I.  Whereas  by  the  article  the  third  of  the  treaty  concluded  at  vSt.  Ildefonso,  the  9th  Vendd- 
miaire,  an.  9  (ist  October,  iSfw, )  between  the  I'irst  Consul  of  the  I'reneh  Re])ublie  and  his  catholic 
majesty,  it  was  aj^reed  as  follows;  "  His  catholic  majesty  jiromises  an<l  en},'aj,'es  on  his  part,  to  cede  to 
the  I'reneh  Republic,  six  months  after  the  full  and  entire  execution  of  the  conditions  and  stipulations 
herein  relative  to  his  royal  highness,  the  Duke  of  I'anna,  the  colony  or  province  of  Louisiana,  with 
the  same  extent  that  it  now  has  in  the  hands  of  Spain,  and  that  it  had  when  France  possessed  it,  and 
Siich  as  it  .should  be  after  the  treaties  subsequently  entered  into  between  .Spain  and  other  States."  And 
whereas,  in  pur.suance  of  the  treatj',  and  particularly  of  the  third  article,  the  I'reneh  Republic  has  an 
incontestible  title  to  the  domain  and  to  the  jjo.ssession  of  the  said  territory:  The  I'irst  Con.sul  of  the 
French  Republic  desiring  to  give  to  the  United  States  a  .strong  proof  of  his  friendship,  doth  hereby 
cede  to  the  .said  United  Stales,  in  the  name  of  the  French  Republic,  forever  and  in  full  sovereignty, 
the  said  territory,  with  all  its  rights  and  ajipurtenances,  as  fully  and  in  the  same  manner  as  they  have 
been  acquired  by  the  French  Republic,  in  virtue  of  the  above-mentioned  treaty,  concluded  with  His 
catholic  majesty. 

Did  France  recover  possession  of  the  Lotiisiana  it  formerly  owned  and,  if  so, 
was  not  that  Lotiisiana  the  same  as  now  ceded  to  the  United  States?  This  was  a 
vital  question. 

INDKFINITE   BOUNDARIES. 

As  this  description  was  very  vague  and  unsatisfactory  as  to  the  definite 
boundaries  and  extent  of  the  purchase,  our  envoys  quite  properly  insisted  upon  a 
more  specific  identification.  The  domain  to  the  east  of  the  Missi.ssippi  had  all 
been  determined  by  various  treaties,  and  the  claims  of  the  different  nations  were 
generally  well  known,  though  .some  were  not  conceded ;  yet  the  great  empire  lying 
to  the  west  of  the  Mississippi  continued  to  remain  a  source  of  much  trouble  and 
uncertainty,  as  no  satisfactory  data  were  offered  for  specific  boundary,  and  none 
could  be  agreed  upon.  Marbois  expressed  to  Napoleon  the  difficulty  in  reaching  a 
definite  conclusion  as  to  boundary,  and  regretted  the  obscurity  in  which  so  impor- 
tant a  reference  was  made,  but  this  did  not  trouble  the  conscience  of  Nkpoleon, 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


33 


who  replied,  "that  if  an  obscurity  did  not  already  exist,  it  would,  perhaps,  be 
good  policy  to  put  one  there."  Even  when  (iuestioned  as  to  the  eastern  boundar\-, 
evasive  answers  were  returned.  Livinj>;ston  asked  Talleyrand  for  the  descri])tion 
contained  in  the  instructions  jj^iven  by  his  nation  previously  to  Laussat,  and  which 
contained  a  definition  of  the  cession.  "What  are  the  eastern  bounds  of  Louis- 
iana?" asked  Livingston.  "I  do  not  know,"  replied  Talleyrand.  "You  must 
take  it  as  we  received  it."  "Hut  what  did  you  mean  to  take?"  said  Livingston. 
"I  do  not  know,"  replied  Talleyrand.  "Then  you  mean  that  we  shall  construe 
it  our  own  way?"  said  Livingston  again,  to  which  Talleyrand  made  final  reply, 
"I  can  give  you  no  direction.  You  have  made  a  noble  bargain  for  yourselves, 
and  I  suppose  you  will  make  the  most  of  it." 

Our  envoys  did  not  worry  long  over  this  vexed  problem.  They  were  as  eager 
as  the  F'rench  to  close  the  bargain  and  take  the  chances  and,  if  need  be,  rely  on 
future  treaty  stipulations  for  more  certainty  as  to  boundaries.  It  is  evident  that 
careful  attention  was  not  given  to  the  agreement  as  an  entirety,  as  many  omissions 
were  subsequently  observed,  which,  if  more  care  had  been  taken  in  its  preparation 
would  never  have  occurred,  but  as  Livingston  wrote  to  Madison:  "I  was  willing 
to  take  it  under  any  form. "  The  price  agreed  upon  was  finally  fixed  at  6o,uou,ooo 
francs,  in  the  form  of  United  States  6  per  cent  bonds,  in  value  #11,250,000;  and 
in  addition  to  this  our  Government  assumed  the  payment  of  certain  debts  due  to 
our  own  citizens  valued  at  2o,<xk),ocx)  francs,  or  $3,750,000,  making  as  the  total 
consideration  paid,  $15,000,000.  When  we  consider  that  Jefferson  at  one  time 
was  willing  to  give  $2,000,000  for  New  Orleans  alone,  we  can  well  marvel  that 
so  vast  an  empire  as  the  whole  province  should  come  to  us  for  the  price  paid.  We 
can  afford  to  overlook  any  defects  in  the  treaty  details,  and  forever  hold  in  grati- 
tude the  illustrious  men  who,  by  their  diplomatic  skill,  their  earnestness  of  pur- 
pose, and  well-directed  efforts,  achieved  one  of  the  greatest  triumphs  in  the  world's 
history,  and  which,  ore  historian  writes,  "ranked  in  historical  importance  next  to 
the  Declaration  of  Independence  and  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution." 

It  well  justified  the  boast  of  Livingston  as  he  placed  his  name  to  the  treaty 
of  cession,  and  rising  and  shaking  hands  with  Monroe  and  Marbois,  said:  "We 
have  lived  long,  but  this  is  the  noblest  work  of  our  lives." 

RATIFICATIONS   EXCHANGED. 


The  treaties  were  sent  to  Washington  as  fast  as  possible,  as  it  was  Napoleon's 
desire  that  ratifications  should  be  exchanged  at  Washington  rather  than  at  Paris. 
By  this  course  he  hoped  to  gain  time  on  England,  as  this  assured  him  an  earlier 
payment  of  the  money  for  the  purchase.  The  papers  arrived  at  Washington 
July  14,  1803,  and  October  17,  following.  Congress  was  convened;  after  nmch 
discussion  and  contention  as  to  the  constitutional  authority  of  Congress  to  annex 
foreign  territory  to  the  Union,  the  treaty  was  ratified.  Even  with  all  this  done 
our  anxieties  were  not  at  an  end,  nor  our  purchase  secure.     Up  to  this  moment, 

2239 3 


34  THE    LOUISIANA    ITRCHASE. 

Louisiana  still  remained  in  the  possession  and  under  the  government  of  Spain. 
There  had  as  yet  been  no  surrender  to  France  under  the  treaty  of  St.  Ildefonso, 
October  i,  1800,  and  three  years  had  elapsed  since  then.  France  was  not  in  the 
occupancy  of  the  purchase  to  comply  with  the  treaty  ncjjotiated  with  the 
Americans.  Indeed,  when  at  last  the  treaty  was  made  known  to  the  Spaniards 
in  Louisiana  and  even  in  Spain,  protests  were  received  at  Washinjjton  from  both 
quarters.     The  Spanish  minister  served  notice  on  our  Crovernnient — 

that  he  had  orders  to  warn  the  I'ederal  Governiiieiit  to  suspend  the  ratification  and  execution  of  the 
treaties  of  cession  of  Louisiana,  as  the  French  Government  in  securing  the  province  had  contracteil  an 
engagetnent  with  Spain  not  to  retrocecie  it  to  any  other  power.  *  *  »  France  not  having 
executed  that  engagement,  the  treaty  cession  was  void. 

It  was  thought  by  many  that  England  had  united  with  Spain  to  defeat  the 
purchase.  The  French  Government  had  given  orders  that  both  transfers  of 
authority  should  take  place  at  New  Orleans  at  the  same  time,  .so  as  to  expedite 
the  surrender  to  the  United  States  before  England  could  intervene. 

POSSESSION  TAKEN. 

Regardless  of  the  Spanish  protests,  the  French  charg^  d'affaires  at  Washing- 
ton transmitted  instructions  to  the  representative  of  his  government  at  New 
Orleans  for  the  transfer.  The  messenger  reached  there  on  the  23d  of  November, 
1803.  A  conference  followed  between  the  French  and  Spanish  officials  and  it  was 
agreed  to  make  the  change.  The  Spanish  troops  and  militia  were  arrayed  in 
solemn  procession,  and  in  presence  of  those  assembled  the  commissioners  repre- 
senting France  and  Spain  proclaimed  the  missions  they  were  charged  to  execute. 
The  French  commissioner  presented  to  the  Spanish  commissioner  the  order  of  the 
King  of  Spain  for  the  delivery  of  the  province,  dated  more  than  one  year  previous, 
and  with  this  was  also  presented  the  direction  of  Napoleon  to  receive  possession 
in  the  name  of  France.  The  Spanish  governor  then  surrendered  the  keys  of  the 
city,  and  thereupon  the  authority  of  Spain  was  withdrawn  and  the  Spanish  coluiS 
lowered,  as  the  banners  of  France  were  unfurled  to  the  breeze  amid  the  booming 
of  artillery.  The  authority  of  France  continued  for  the  brief  period  of  twenty 
days,  and  then  the  last  change  was  to  occur,  when  the  Stars  and  Stripes  were 
to  wave  over  the  great  empire  west  of  the  Mississippi  and  over  the  island  of 
New  Orleans.  On  December  20,  1803,  the  American  troops  marched  into  the 
metropolis  and  the  French  prefect  sadly  announced: 

In  conformity  with  the  treaty  I  put  the  United  States  in  possession  of  Louisiana  and  its  depend- 
encies. The  citizens  and  inhabitants  who  wish  to  remain  here  and  obey  the  laws  are  from  this  moment 
exonerated  from  the  oath  of  fidelity  to  the  French  Republic. 

Thereupon  the  American  governor,  with  patriotic  delight,  addressing  the 
concourse  present,  said: 

The  cession  secures  to  you  and  your  descendants  the  inheritance  of  liberty,  perpetual  laws,  and 
magistrates  whom  you  will  elect  yourselves. 


\ 


J 


THE   LOUISIANA    PURCHASK.  35 

As  the  I'VciicIi  colors  came  clown  and  the  Red,  While  and  lUue  of  the  Ameri- 
can Republic  went  up,  the  trumpets  sounded,  the  troops  saluted,  and  j^ladsome 
voices  shouted  long  and  loud  in  lionor  of  one  of  the  j^reatest  events  in  our  history. 

W 

A    KIVAI.KV    FOR    HONOR. 

As  every  authentic  reference  to  the  history  of  this  cession  is  of  precious  value 
at  this  day,  I  can  not  refrain  from  addinji;  an  extract  from  one  of  Mr.  Livinj^ston's 
letters,  tending  to  show  the  zealous  pride  he  felt  for  his  participation  in  that  suc- 
cess, and  his  desire  that  the  credit  for  the  negotiation  should  be  given  to  him 
rather  than  to  Mr.  Monroe: 

I  have  ill  my  foniicr  leUer  informed  you  of  M.  Talleyrand's  callinf^  upon  me  previous  to  the 
arrival  of  Mr.  Monroe,  for  a  proposition  for  the  whole  of  Louisiana;  of  his  afterwards  triflin){  with  me, 
and  tellinj;  me  f/iat  wlial  he  said  Tca.s  iiiiniithorizfj.  This  circumstance,  for  which  I  have  accounted  to 
you  in  one  of  v  ■  'etters,  led  me  to  think,  though  it  afterwards  appeared  without  reason,  that  some 
change  had  tal. .  place  in  the  determination  which  I  knew  the  Consul  had  before  taken  to  sell.  I  had 
just  then  received  a  line  from  Mr.  Monroe,  informinj^  me  of  his  arrival.  I  wrote  a  hasty  answer,  under 
the  influence  of  ideas,  excited  by  these  prevarications  of  the  minister,  expressinj^  the  hope  that  he  had 
brought  information  that  New  Orleans  was  in  our  possession:  that  I  hoped  our  negotiations  might  be 
sncceasfttl;  but  that,  while  I  feared  nothing  but  war  would  avail  us  anything,  I  had  paved  the  way  for 
him.  This  letterisvery  imprudently  shown  and  spoken  of  by  Mr.  Monroe's  particular  friends,  as  a  proof 
tliat  he  had  been  the  principftl  agent  in  the  negotiation.     So  far,  indeed,  as  it  may  tend  to  this  object,  , 

it  is  of  little  moment;  because  facts  and  dates  are  too  well  known  to  be  contradicted.  I'or  instance,  it 
is  known  to  everybody  here  that  the  Consul  had  taken  his  resolution  to  sell  previous  to  Mr.  Monroe's 
arrival.  It  is  a  fact  well  known  that  M.  Marbois  was  authorized,  informally,  by  the  First  Consul  to 
treat  with  me  before  Mr.  Monroe  reached  Paris;  that  he  actuallv  made  me  the  very  proposition  we 
ultimately  agreed  to,  before  Mr.  Monroe  had  seen  a  minister,  except  M.  Marbois,  for  a  moment,  at  n»y 

house,  where  he  came  to  make  the  proposition:  Mr.  Monroe  not  having  beei'  p'esented  to  M.  Talley-  ,; 

rand,  to  whom  I  introduced  him  the  afternoon  of  the  next  day.     All,  then,  tliat  remained  to  negotiate,  \ 

after  his  arrival,  was  a  diminution  of  the  price;  and  in  this  our  joint  omission  was  unfortunate,  for  we  ,: 

came  up,  as  soon  as  Mr.  Monroe's  illness  would  suffer  him  to  do  business,  after  u  few  days  delay,  to  j 

the  minister's  offers.     There  is  no  doubt  that  Mr.  Monroe's  talents  and  address  would  have  enabled  j 

hitn,  had  he  been  placed  in  my  circumstances,  to  have  effected  what  I  have  done.     But  he  unfor-  .  ' 

tunately  came  too  late  to  do  more  than  assent  to  the  propo.sitions  that  were  made  us,  and  to  aid  in  1 

reducing  them  to  form.     (Livingston  to  Madison,  Nov.   15,  1803.     American  State  Papers,  Foreign  j 

Relations,  vol.  2,  p.  573. )  * 

The  credit  here  claimed  by  Mr.  Livingston  is  put  in  question  by  M.  Mar- 
bois, who  asserts  that  the  preliminary  discussions  were  scarcely  entered  on,  and  \ 
that  their  results  could  not  have  been  anticipated  when  Mr.  Monroe  reached  ] 
Havre.  (See  Marbois's  Louisiana.)  This  statement  seems"  to  be  confirmed  by  \ 
reference  to  Monroe's  Memoir,  wherein  it  is  stated  that,  in  the  first  conference  •  \ 
between  Livingston  and  Monroe  after  the  latter's  arrival  in  Paris,  Livingston  j 
.said  to  him:  "Only  force  can  give  us  New  Orleans.  We  must  employ  force,  | 
Let  us  first  get  possession  of  the  country  and  negotiate  afterwards."  | 

Marbois  narrates  that  Monroe  was  not  discouraged  by  the  gloomy  view  enter-  >ji 

tained  by  Livingston,  but  entered  upon  his  conference  the  next  day  with  zeal.  | 

However  this  may  be,  Livingston  richly  merits  our  everlasting  gratitude,  and  his  \ 
name  will  go  down  with  honor  with  those  of  Monroe  and  Jefferson. 


36  THE   LOUISIANA  PURCHAvSE. 

THE   MAGNITUDK  OK   THK   PURCHASE. 

The  entire  area  comprised  in  the  Louisiana  Purchase  covers  883,072  square 
miles,  and  contains  565, 166,080  acres.  This  exchxdes  the  area  west  of  the  Rocky 
Mountains,  and  also  tliat  east  of  the. Mississippi,  which  latter  by  other  treaties  is 
counted  as  a  portion  of  the  Florida  cession,  and  that  frosn  Oreat  Britain.  The 
original  "Louisiana"  contained  appro .ximately  571,873,920  acres,  and  covered 
89^,553  square  miles.  The  area  as  given  in  the  "Public  Domain"  and  General 
Land  Office  Reports  is  756, 961, 280  acres,  or  1,182,752  square  miles.  This  errone- 
ously includes  the  Oregon  country. 

The  Louisiana  Purchase  proper  em'oraces  the  entire  States  of  Arkan.sas,  Mis- 
souri, Iowa,  Nebraska,  North  and  vSouth  Dakota,  parts  of  the  States  of  Minnessota, 
Kansas,  Colorado,  Montana,  Wyoming,  Louisiana,  all  of  the  Indian  Territory,  and 
part  of  Oklahoma  Territory. 

Its  area  is  more  than  seven  times  that  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland;  more  than 
four  times  that  of  the  German  Empire,  or  of  the  Austrian  Empire,  or  of  France; 
more  than  three  times  that  of  Spain  and  Portugal;  more  than  seven  times  the  size 
of  Italy  and  twice  that  of  Egypt;  nearly  ten  times  that  of  Turkey  and  Greece; 
nearly  three  times  that  of  Sweden  and  Norway,  and  nearly  six  times  that  of  the 
Japanese  Empire.  It  is  also  larger  than  Great  Britain,  Germany,  France,  Spain, 
Portugal  and  Italy  combined.  It  is  about  one-fourth  less  than  the  area  of  the 
thirteen  original  States. 

According  to  the  census  of  1890  it  had  then  a  population  of  11,232,439. 

It  produced  in  1896,  according  to  the  reports  of  the  Department  of  Agricul- 
ture, 1,145,137,081  bushels  of  corn,  valued  at  1191,812,676;  151,395,786  bushels 
of  wheat,  valued  at  1111,488,251;  and  260,822,175  bushels  of  oats,  valued  at 
$41,660,266. 

The  value  of  real  and  personal  property  in  1890  was  $3,190,456,461. 

The  area  of  public  lands  disposed  of  to  1897  amounted  to  510,858  square  miles, 
while  the  public  lands  remaining  unsnrveyed  aggregated  125,192  square  miles. 
The  area  unappropriated  and  .subject  to  entry  equals  188,300  square  miles. 

EARLY  OPPOSITION   TO  ANNEXATION. 

In  the  face  of  every  effort  on  the  part  of  our  Government  to  acquire  valuable 
foreign  territory,  there  have  always  been  those  high  in  authority  and  influential 
in  the  nation  who  predicted  disaster,  belittled  the  present  or  prospective  value  of 
the  proposed  acquisition,  and  discouraged  the  policy  or  disputed  the  constitu- 
tional authority  for  such  additions  to  our  domain,  whether  such  extensions  were 
by  purchase  or  voluntary  offering  without  price.  It  is,  however,  equally  true,  and 
a  significant  answer,  that,  without  a  single  exception  in  our  history,  every  such 
acquisition  has  proven  immensely  valuable,  and  while  it  enlarged  it  also  .strength- 
ened and  enriched  our  common  country.     In  reviewing  the  industrial  develop- 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


37 


ment  of  the  United  States  and  their  capacity  for  the  absorption  and  support  of  the 
millions  of  population  which  we  have  invdted  from  other  countries,  it  has  been 
the  wonder  of  the  j^rcarest  thinkers  that,  in  our  numerous  acquisitions  of  such 
vast  areas,  we  should  not  have  added  much  more  waste  and  worthless  domain  to 
our  i^ossessions.  With  our  present  knowledge  and  appreciation  of  the  Louisiana 
cession,  it  may  be  of  interest,  at  this  time,  to  reproduce  the  exact  language  used 
ninety-five  years  ago  by  many  in  this  country  in  severe  condemnation  of  this 
cession.  Jefferson  himself  suffered  bitter  detraction  and  personal  ridicule.  I 
append  various  extracts  from  speeches  in  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representa- 
tives in  relation  to  that  cession,  viz: 

Senator  Pickering,  of  Massachusctls,  November  3,  1803,  said: 

It  is  declared  in  the  third  article  (of  the  treaty )  that  "the  inhabiUinls  of  the  ceded  territory  shall 
he  incorporated  in  the  Union  of  the  United  States."  But  neither  the  President  and  Senate,  nor  the 
President  and  Conjjress,  are  competent  to  such  an  act  of  incorporation.  He  believed  the  assent  of 
each  individual  State  to  he  necessary  for  the  admission  of  a  foreign  country  as  an  associate  in  the  Union. 

Senator  Tracy,  of  Connecticut,  said: 

We  can  hold  territory;  but  to  admit  the  iidiabitants  into  the  Union,  to  make  citizens  of  them, 
and  States,  by  treaty,  we  can  not  constitutionally  do;  and  no  subsequent  act  of  legislation,  or  even 
ordinary  amendment  to  our  Constitution  can  legalize  such  measures.  If  done  at  all,  they  must  be  done 
by  universal  consent  of  all  the  States  or  partners  to  our  political  association. 

Representative  Griswold,  of  Connecticut,  October  25,  1803,  said: 

It  is  noi.  consistent  with  the  spirit  of  a  republican  governmetit  that  its  territory  should  be 
exceedingly  l-irge;  for,  as  you  extend  your  limits  you  increase  the  difficulties  arising  from  a  want  of 
that  similarity  af  customs,  habits  and  niatuiers  so  essential  for  its  support. 


It  will  not  be  found  eitlie  in  the  report  of  the  secret  comtnittee  which  has  recently  been  published, 
or  in  any  document  or  debate,  that  any  individual  entertained  the  least  wi.sh  to  obtain  the  province  of 
Louisiana;  our  views  were  then  confine<l  to  New  Orleans  and  the  Ploridas.  *  *  *  The  vast  and 
unmanageable  extent  which  the  accession  of  Louisiana  will  give  the  United  St.ites;  the  conse(|ueut 
dispersion  of  our  population,  and  the  destruction  of  that  balance  which  it  is  so  important  to  maintain 
between  the  Eastern  and  Western  .States,  threatens,  at  no  very  distant  day,  the  subversion  of  our  I'nion. 

Representative  Griffin,  of  Virginia,  sa"d: 

He  feared  the  effect  of  the  vast  extent  of  our  enii)ire;  he  feared  the  effects  of  the  increased  value 
of  labor,  the  decrease  in  the  value  of  laiuls,  and  the  induence  of  climate  upon  our  citizens  who  should 
migrate  thither.  He  did  fear  (though  this  land  was  represented  as  flowing  with  milk  and  honey)  that 
this  Eden  of  the  New  World  would  prove  a  cemetery  for  the  botlies  of  our  citizens. 

Senator  Plumer,  of  New  Hami)shire,  said : 

Admit  this  western  world  into  the  U  lion  and  you  <lestroy  at  once  the  weight  and  importance  of 
the  Eastern  States  and  compel  them  to  establish  a  separate,  independent  empire. 

Senator  James  White,  of  Delaware,  said : 

But  as  to  Louisiana  —this  new,  immense,  unbounded  world — if  it  should  ever  be  incorporated  itito 
the  Union,  of  which  I  have  no  idea,  can  only  be  done  by  amending  the  Constitution,  I  believe  it  will 
l)e  the  greatest  curse  that  could  at  present  befall  us.  It  may  be  productive  of  inmunerable  evils,  and 
especially  of  one  that  I  fear  to  ever  look  uj)on.  *  *  *  Thus  our  citizens  will  be  removed  to  the 
immense  distance  of  two  or  three  thou.sand  miles  from  the  eajntal  of  the  I'nion,  where  they  will  scarcely 


38 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


ever  feel  the  rays  of  the  General  Government — their  affections  will  become  alienated;  tliej-  will  grad- 
ually begin  to  view  us  as  strangers — they  will  form  other  commercial  connections,  and  our  interests  will 
become  distinct.  *  *  *  And  I  do  saj'  that  under  existing  circumstances,  even  supposing  that  this 
extent  of  territory  was  a  desirable  acquisition,  fifteen  millions  of  dollars  was  a  most  enormous  sum 
to  give. 

A   STRIKING   CONTRAST. 

A  very  few  illustrations,  in  the  development  of  the  country  embraced  within 
the  Louisiana  Purchase,  will  suffice  to  disprove  the  gloomy  forebodings  expressed 
as  to  the  effect  of  such  an  expansion  of  our  empire.  I  illustrate  not  with  such 
older  States  as  Louisiana,  Iowa,  Kansas,  Arkansas,  Missouri,  or  even  Minnesota, 
with  her  60,000,000  bushels  of  wheat,  ranking  her  as  first  among  the  producers  of 
our  nation's  wheat  yield  of  530,000,000  bushels  in  1897,  not  to  mention  her  many 
other  resources,  but  prefer  rather  to  select  the  more  remote  and  most  recently 
developed  portions  of  the  Louisiana  Purchase  nearer  the  Rockj-  Mountain  region, 
as  here  the  record  will  read  enough  like  a  fairy  tale  to  interest  and  delight  as 
well  as  amaze  any  well-wisher  of  his  country. 

The  report  of  the  State  commissioner  of  mines  of  Colorado  for  1897  fur- 
nishes the  following  as  the  production  and  value  of  four  metals  mined  in  that 
State  for  the  year  named : 

Gold— 947,249  ounces $xg,  579,  636.  83 

Silver— 21,278,202  ounces 12,  692,  447.  47 

Copper-9, 151,592  pounds 960,  917.  13 

Lead — 80,799,778  pounds 2,  731, 032.  49 


Total I35,  964,  033.  92 

Colorado's  gold  yield  now  exceeds  that  of  California  and  it  is  ahead  of 
any  other  S.'ate  in  this  respect.  The  sheep  of  Colorado  for  1897  were  valued 
at  $3,869,445  while  the  oxen,  milch  cows  and  other  cattle  were  valued  at 
$27,177,017  as  reported  by  the  Agricultural  Department.  Her  coal  yield  for 
1896  was  valued  at  $3,606,642  as  per  report  of  the  Geological. vSurvey;  and  her 
wheat  yield  for  1897  aggregated  5,117,000  bushels. 

Looking  to  the  neighboring  State  of  Wyoming,  we  do  not  find  a  record  for 
the  precious  metals,  but  see  a  pastoral  wealth  of  vast  extent.  Her  2,000,000 
sheep  were  valued  at  $5,714,332  and  her  oxen,  milch  cows  and  other  cattle  were 
valued  at  $17,000,000. 

Passing  to  the  adjoining  State  of  Montana — like  Wyoming,  astride  the  Rocky 
Mountains — we  observe  a  marvelous  combination  of  mineral,  agricultural  and 
pastoral  wealth.  The  mineral  yield  of  that  State  for  1897,  ^^  reported  by  the 
Helena,  Montana,  assay  office,  was  as  follows  : 


MeUls. 


Customary  meas- 
ures. 


Oold Fine  ounces. . 

Silver do 

Copper  I  Kiiie  pounds  . 

Lead do 


Total . 


Quantity. 


Value. 


217,514.846 
16, 307, 346 
237. 158, 540 
25.794,974 


$  4,496,430.92 

*  21,  730,  710.03 

26,798,915.02 

928,619.06 


$53. 954. 675  03 


'Coinage  value. 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE.  39 

The  mountains  and  streams  of  Montana  have  yielded  $750,000,000  of  precious 
metals  to  the  wealth  of  the  world  since  the  advent  of  those  pioneers  whose  arrival 
was  almost  coincident  with  the  discovery  there  of  gold  in  1862. 

This  ranks  Montana  first  in  order  in  silver  production  as  Colorado  ranks 
first  in  gold.  Her  copper  product  also  ranked  her  as  first  in  order  for  the  same 
\ear.  Her  coal  yield  for  1896  was  valued  at  $2,279,672  as  per  report  of  the 
Geological  Survey. 

The  Montana  oxen,  milch  cows  and  other  cattle  were  valued  at  $25,151,882 
while  her  3,247,641  sheep,  valued  at  $7,804,081  rank  her  now  as  first  on  the  roll 
of  the  wool-growing  States  and  Territories  of  the  Union.  Her  wheat  yield  for 
1897  amounted  to  2,268,000  bushels. 

South  Dakota  is  another  instance  of  marvelous  development.  Her  gold  yield 
in  1897  was  $5,300,000  and  ranked  fourth  among  the  gold-producing  States,  while 
her  wheat  yield  was  21,441,248  bushels,  valued  at  $14,794,461. 

North  Dakota  yielded  28,383,552  bushels,  valued  at  $20,981,628.  North  and 
South  Dakota  combined  produced  nearly  one-tenth  of  all  the  wheat  produced  in 
the  United  States,  and  yet  these  States  twelv-^  years  ago  embraced  but  one  Terri- 
tory, not  thought  qualified  at  that  time  for  statehood. 

Perhaps  one  of  the  most  remarkable  evidences  of  development  is  that  which 
is  exhibited  in  the  case  of  Oklahoma  Territory.  Only  eight  years  ago  that  por- 
tion of  the  Louisiana  Purchase  was  still  an  Indian  reservation — a  part  of  the 
Indian  Territory,  and  the  hunting  ground  of  the  tribes  therein.  So  rapid  has 
been  the  progress  since  the  opening  to  settlement  was  formally  declared  in  1889, 
that  there  was  a  population,  as  returned  by  the  assessor  for  1896,  exceeding  275,000 
which  is  now  largely  increased;  and  more  votes  were  cast  there  in  that  year  than 
are  cast  in  Florida  or  Delaware.  From  the  last  annual  report  of  Governor  C.  M. 
Barnes,  the  total  wheat  produced  for  1897  is  found  to  be  20,000,000  bushels,  as 
per  shipments,  while  the  cotton  crop  marketed  amounted  to  40,000  bales,  and  for 
this  year  125,000  bales  is  the  estimate.  If  this  is  to  mark  the  advance  of  eight 
years,  what  shall  we  not  expect  in  twenty  years  to  follow!  No  other  parallel 
exists — not  even  in  the  California  days  of  '49 — as  to  such  a  growth  of  population 
and  civil  government.  Towns  and  cities  were  literally  built  in  a  night;  farms 
were  cleared  for  the  plow;  the  cereals  and  esculents  planted;  orchards  prepared; 
and  a  system  of  orderly  business  inaugurated  in  thirty  days,  which  in  other  Ter- 
ritories have  required  one  or  more  years  to  accomplish.  It  is  an  illustration  of 
what  American  enterprise  and  intelligent  effort  can  accomplish  under  the  stimulus 
of  our  free  institutionn. 

THE  LEWIS  AND  CLARKE  EXPEDITION. 

The  treaty  of  the  Louisiana  cession  was  concluded  April  30,  1803,  but  even 
previous  to  that,  Jefferson,  while  Secretary  of  State  under  Washington  in  1792, 
was  anxious  to  explore  the  country  between  the  Mississippi  and  Rocky  Mountains ; 
he  was  desirous  of  extending  connnercial  relations  among  the  Indian  tribes  of 


40  THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 

that  region  and  to  the  more  remote  West,  and  of  diverting  to  onr  own  people  the 
traffic  of  those  countries  which  was  then  largely  monopolized  by  Canadian  and 
British  traders.  He  communicated  with  the  American  Philosophical  Society, 
suggesting  that  the  services  of  a  suitable  person  be  secured  to  visit  the  Missouri 
river,  thence  cross  the  Rocky  Mountains  and  proceed  as  far  as  the  sea;  he 
expressed  the  hope  to  the  society  that  a  subscription  might  be  raised  to  aid 
such  an  object.  Capt.  Meriwether  Lewis,  a  captain  in  the  regular  Army,  and  at 
that  time  serving  in  Virginia,  heard  of  this  proposition  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  and  to 
him  offered  to  undertake  such  a  journey.  No  means  being  at  hand  it  was  not 
undertaken.  When,  however,  Jefferson  became  President  the  project  was  still 
uppermost  in  his  mind,  and  in  a  message  addressed  to  Congress  January  i8,  1803, 
he  recommended  that  an  expedition  be  atithorized  at  government  expense  for  the 
purposes  mentioned.  Congress  responded  with  a  generous  appropriation  and  a 
company  was  selected  under  the  personal  supervision  of  the  President. 

The  early  request  of  Captain  Lewis,  who  had  since  then  been  selected  by 
President  Jefferson  as  his  private  secretary,  was  now  remembered,  and  thus  his 
name  with  that  of  Captain  Clarke  is  inseparably  connected  with  this  world- 
renowned  expedition. 

Though  the  instructions  for  the  expedition  were  not  drafted  until  June  20, 
1803,  which  was  after  Louisiana  had  been  ceded  to  the  United  States,  yet  it  was 
before  the  treaties  reached  Washington,  July  14,  1803. 

It  is  argued  that  the  sending  of  this  expedition  to  the  Pacific  is  an  evidence 
that  Jefferson  regarded  that  country  as  a  part  of  the  Louisiana  Purcha.se,  and  hence 
that  he  desired  full  information  of  the  possession.  This  is  an  erroneous  assump- 
tion, as  it  is  of  record  that  Jefferson's  desire  was  to  improve  and  extend  our  traffic 
with  the  natives;  this  is  manifest  from  a  reading  of  the  instructions  to  Lewis 
and  Clarke,  which  direct  that  they  inform  them.selves  "of  the  circumstances  which 
may  decide  whether  the  furs  of  those  Indians  may  not  be  collected  as  advanta- 
geously at  the  head  waters  of  the  Missouri,  convenient,  as  is  supposed,  to  the 
waters  of  the  Colorado  and  Oregon  or  Columbia,  as  at  Nootka  Sound  or  any  other 
point  of  that  coast,  and  that  trade  be  consequently  conducted  through  the  Mis- 
souri and  United  States  more  beneficially  than  by  the  circumnavigation  now 
practiced.''  They  were  to  hold  communication  with  the  various  Indian  tribes  in 
an  endeavor  to  establi.sh  amicable  trading  relations.  When  Congress  authorized 
this  expedition  no  information  had  reached  this  country  that  there  was  even  an 
offer  on  the  part  of  France  to  sell  us  Louisiana.  We  had  confined  our  attention  to 
the  Floridas  and  to  New  Orleans,  and  had  expressed  no  desire  for  anything  west- 
ward of  the  Mi.ssissippi.  The  Lewis  and  Clarke  instructions  made  it  evident  that 
Jefferson  was  not  even  considering  the  country  west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains  as 
an  American  possession,  since  he  suggests  that  the  head  waters  of  the  Missouri, 
being  convenient  to  the  Columbia  river  across  the  mountains,  might  be  selected 
for  the  purpose  of  collecting  the  furs  obtained  on  the  waters  of  the  Columbia  and 
Colorado,  instead  of  transporting  them  to  Nootka  Sound  on  the  Pacific,  and  thence 
via  Cape  Horn  to  the  United  States — a  long  and  expensive  journey.     The  naviga- 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE.  41 

tion  of  the  Missouri  to  its  head  was  a  prime  object,  and  this  was  investi<jated  by 
Lewis  and  Clarke,  as  they  proceeded  by  boats  as  far  as  it  was  possible  to  ^o,  and 
their  diary  is  complete  on  this  point.  "Through  the  Missouri  and  United  States" 
are  the  words  which  Jefferson  writes  to  Lewis  and  Clarke;  and  they  imply  that  the 
Missouri  was  not  then  understood  by  him  to  be  in  the  United  States.  Therefore 
it  is  plain  that  the  expedition  of  Lewis  and  Clarke  was  not  even  in  anticipation  of 
the  purchase  of  any  country  west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains,  but  for  trade  purposes 
only. 

This  view  is  confirmed  by  a  letter,  from  Jefferson  to  Lewis,  written  after  the 
cession  of  Louisiana,  which  indicates  the  opinion  he  then  held  as  to  our  western 
boundary,  as  since  established,  being  the  "highlands  inclosing  all  the  waters  which 
run  into  the  Mississippi  or  Missouri  directly  or  indirectly,"  which  then  made  the 
Missouri  a  part  of  the  United  States,  which  it  was  not  when  the  expedition  was 
formed;  the  letter  also  confirms  the  view  as  to  the  original  purpose — "the  direct 
water  communication  from  sea  to  sea  formed  by  the  bed  of  the  Missouri  and  per- 
haps the  Oregon."     The  following  is  a  portion  of  Jefferson's  letter: 

Washington,  Novewber  16,  rSoj. 
To  Captain  Lkwis, 

Dkar  Sir,— I  have  not  written  to  you  since  the  nth  and  15th  of  July,  *  *  *  The  present  has 
been  lonj<  delayed  by  an  expectation  daily  of  getting  the  enclosed  account  of  Louisiana  through  the 
press.  The  materials  are  received  from  different  persons,  of  good  authority.  I  enclose  you  also 
copies  of  the  treaties  for  Louisiana,  the  act  for  taking  possession  *  *  *  Orders  went  from  hence 
signed  by  the  King  of  Spain  and  the  first  consul  of  France,  so  as  to  arrive  at  Natchez  yesterday 
evening,  and  we  expect  the  delivery  of  the  province  at  New  Orleans  will  take  place  about  the  close  of 
the  ensuing  week,  sa}'  about  the  26th  instant.  *  *  *  At  the  moment  of  delivering  over  the  ports 
in  the  vicinity  of  New  Orleans,  orders  will  be  despatched  from  thence  to  those  in  upper  Louisiana  to 
evacuate  and  deliver  them  immediately.  *  *  *  you  must  not  undertake  the  winter  excursion 
which  you  propose  in  yours  of  October  3d.  Such  an  excursion  will  be  more  dangerous  than  the  tnain 
expedition  up  the  Mi.ssouri,  and  woidd  by  an  accident  to  you,  hazard  our  main  object,  which,  since  our 
acquisition  of  Louisiana,  interests  everybody  in  the  highest  degree.  The  object  of  }-our  mission  is 
.single,  the  direct  water  communication  from  .sea  to  sea  formed  by  the  bed  of  the  Mi.s.souri,  and  per- 
hajjs  the  Oregon ;  by  having  Mr.  Clark  with  j'ou  we  consider  the  expedition  as  double  manned  and 
therefore  the  less  liable  to  failure ;  for  which  rea.son  neither  of  you  should  be  exposed  to  risks  by 
going  off  of  your  line  *  *  *  As  the  boundaries  of  interior  Louisiana  are  the  high  lands  enclosing 
all  the  waters  which  run  into  the  Mi.ssissippi  or  Mis.souri  directly  or  indirectly,  with  a  quarter  breiidth 
on  the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  it  becomes  interesting  to  fix  with  precision  by  celestial  ob.servations  the  lon- 
gitude and  latitude  of  the  sources  of  these  rivers,  so  providing  points  in  the  contour  of  our  new 
limits.  This  will  be  attempte<l  distinctly  from  your  mission,  which  we  consider  as  of  major  impor- 
tance, and  therefore,  not  to  be  delayed  or  hazarded  by  any  episodes  whatever. 

JKKFKRSON'S  OBJKCT  WAS  TO  SI-XTRE   TRADE    RELATIONS. 

A  still  further  evidence  of  Jefferson's  great  object  in  promoting  our  trade 

relations  among  the  Indian  tribes  west  of  the  Mississippi,  whicli  trade  extending 

to  the  Pacific  was  then  so  lucrative  to  foreign  companies,  is  found  in  his  letter  to 

Astor,  five  years  after  the  cession,  as  follows : 

Washington,  .if>ril  /_?,  iSoS. 
To  Mr.  John  Jacob  Astor. 

Sir, — I  have  regretted  the  delay  of  this  answer  to  your  letter  of  I-'ebruary  27th,  but  it  has  pro- 
ceeded from  circumstances  which  did  not  depend  on  me.     I  learn  with  great  satisfaction  the  disposition 


42 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


of  our  merchants  to  form  into  companies  for  undertaking  the  Indian  trade  within  our  own  territories. 
I  have  been  taught  to  believe  it  an  advantageous  one  for  the  individual  adventurers,  and  I  consider  it 
as  highly  desirable  to  have  that  trade  centred  in  the  hands  of  our  own  citizens.  The  field  is  immense, 
and  would  occupy  a  vast  extent  of  capital  by  different  companies  engaging  in  different  districts.  All 
beyond  the  Mis,sis.sippi  is  ours  exclusively,  and  it  will  be  in  our  power  to  give  our  own  traders  great 
advantages  over  their  foreign  competitors  on  this  side  the  Missis.sippi.  You  may  be  assured  that  in 
order  to  get  the  whole  of  this  business  passed  into  the  hands  of  our  own  citizens,  and  to  oust  foreign 
traders,  who  so  much  abuse  their  privilege  by  endeavoring  to  excite  the  Indians  to  war  on  us,  every 
reasonable  patronage  and  facility  in  the  power  of  the  Executive  will  be  afforded.  I  .salute  you  with 
respect. 

Whatever  the  motive  may  have  been  which  prompted  the  Iyewi.s  and  Clarke 
expedition,  it  remains  as  the  first  exploration  of  the  valley  of  the  Columbia  river, 
from  its  head  to  the  sea,  and  forms  a  snbstantial  link  in  the  chain  throngh  which 
we  deduced  our  rightful  claim  to  that  entire  country  later  on.  Lewis  and  Clarke 
arrived  at  the  mouth  of  the  Columbia  river  November  15,  1805,  where  they  con- 
structed Fort  Clatsop,  and  remained  during  the  wit?  er  of  1805-1806.  Upon  the 
return  of  the  expedition,  Lewis  was  very  approprii  .dy  sei  ted  as  governor  of 
Louisiana,  while  later  his  old  associate,  Captain  Clarke,  with  equal  propriety, 
was  appointed  by  President  Madison,  in  1813,  governor  of  the  Missouri  Territory. 
As  a  further  evidence  of  the  nation's  gratitude  mimificent  grants  of  public  lands 
were  bestowed  upon  each  of  these  men. 


THE   FLORIDA    BOUNDARIES   UNCERTAIN. 


The  cession  of  Louisiana  from  France  being  now  complete,  the  previous 
uncertainty  as  to  the  western  boundary  of  the  Floridas  became  a  prolific  source  of 
trouble  and  anxiety  to  several  nations,  and  at  one  time  pressed  our  country  to  the 
verge  of  war.  When  Talleyrand  said  to  Livingston:  "  Do  you  want  the  whole  of 
Louisiana?"  Livingston  replied,  "No;  only  New  Orleans  and  the  Floridas." 
He  was  then  of  the  opinion  that  France  possessed  the  Floridas.  Livingston  also 
convinced  Monroe  that  the  Floridas  were  included  in  the  Louisiana  Purchase. 
President  Jefferson  was  at  one  time  in  doubt  upon  this  point.  This  may  seem 
incredible,  but  when  it  is  understood  that  the  secret  treaty  of  Paris  of  October  i, 
1800,  retroceding  Louisiana  to  France  was  not  made  public  in  full  until  1820, 
when  for  the  first  time  it  appeared  in  the  French  and  Spanish  languages,  it  can 
be  seen  how  erroneous  impressions  were  then  formed.  Mr.  Jefferson's  letter  to 
Mr.  Madison  (then  Secretary  of  State),  a  few  months  afLer  the  cession  to  us,  is  of 
interest  on  this  line  : 

M0NTICEI,I,0,  August  2S,  fSoj. 

Dear  Sir,— Your  two  favors  of  the  i8th  and  20th  were  received  on  the  2 1st.  *  »  *  I  suppose 
Monroe  will  touch  on  the  limits  of  Louisiana  only  incidentally,  inasmuch  as  its  extension  to  Perdido 
curtails  Florida,  and  renders  it  of  less  worth.  I  have  used  my  spare  moments  to  investigate,  by  the 
help  of  my  books  here,  the  subject  of  the  limits  of  Louisiana.  I  am  satisfied  our  right  to  the 
Perdido  is  substantial,  and  can  be  opposed  by  a  quibble  on  form  only;  and  our  right  westwardly 
to  the  Bay  of  St.  Bernard,  may  be  strongly  maintained.  I  will  use  the  first  leisure  to  make  a  state- 
ment of  the  facts  and  principles  on  which  this  depends    *    ■»    * 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


43 


At  the  time  of  the  retrocession  to  France  it  was  understood  and  admitted  by 
all  parties  that  the  Floridas  were  in  the  physical  possession  of  Spain ;  the 
language  of  the  Louisiana  sale  to  our  nation  reads:  "Louisiana,  with  the  same 
extent  that  it  now  has  in  the  hands  of  Spain,  and  that  it  had  when  France  pos- 
sessed it,  and  such  as  it  should  be  after  the  treaties  subsequently  entered  into 
between  Spain  and  other  States"  ;  and  as  our  negotiators  understood  that  at  one 
time  the  western  part  of  the  Floridas  formed  a  portion  of  Louisiana,  Livingston 
insisted  that  our  purchase  included  the  same.  "What  are  the  eastern  bounds  of 
Louisiana?"  he  asked  of  Talleyrand.  "I  do  not  know  ;  you  must  take  it  as  we 
received  it,"  was  the  reply.  "But  what  do  you  mean  to  take?"  asked  Livingston. 
"I  do  not  know,"  said  Talleyrand.  In  the  face  of  this  attempted  interpretation 
of  the  purchase  by  Livingston,  there  remained  of  record  in  the  State  Department 
at  Washington  his  reply  of  the  year  before  to  the  French  minister,  who  inquired 
as  to  our  meaning  of  the  extent  of  Louisiana,  and  Livingston  replied:  "  Since  the 
possession  of  the  Floridas  by  Britain  and  the  treaty  of  1763,  I  think  there  can  be 
no  doubt  as  to  the  precise  meaning  of  the  terms."  He  had  also  urged  that 
Napoleon  intercede  with  Spain  for  the  Floridas.  It  is  true  that  there  was  some 
plausibility  in  the  other  view.  The  French  claimed  the  Iberville  by  discovery, 
and,  under  the  rule,  could  well  claim  the  country  drained  by  it  to  the  eastward. 

Following  up  the  Mississippi  river  from  the  mouth  of  the  Iberville,  the  same 
country  along  the  east  of  the  river  was  claimed  by  France  and  conceded  later 
by  Spain.  Was  it  not  natural  that  the  eastern  bank  of  the  Iberville  and  the 
country  drained  by  it  should  also  belong  to  France?  The  first  attempt  to  define 
boundaries  was  in  the  treaty  of  1763,  wherein  France  agrees  with  England  that  the 
confines  between  the  two  countries  shall  be  a  line  "along  the  middle  of  the  river 
Mississippi,  from  its  source  to  the  river  Iberville,  and  from  thence  by  a  line  drawn 
along  the  middle  of  this  river,  and  the  lakes  Maurepas  and  Pontchartrain,  to  the 
sea  ;  and  for  this  purpose,  the  most  Christian  King  cedes  in  full  right  and  guarantees 
to  his  Britannic  Majesty,  the  river  and  port  of  Mobile,  and  everything  which  he 
possesses,  or  ought  to  possess,  on  the  left  side  of  the  river  Mississippi,  except  the 
town  of  New  Orleans  and  the  island  in  which  it  is  situated,"  England  in  the 
same  treaty  became  possessed  of  Florida  from  Spain,  and  hence  the  occasion  for 
defining  the  lines  between  France  and  England.  If  West  Florida  belonged  to 
France  and  was  included  in  the  cession  by  France  to  England  "  of  everything 
which  he  possesses  on  the  left  side  of  the  river  Mississippi,"  and  subsequently 
was  included  in  the  retrocession  of  F'lorida  to  Spain  by  England,  might  it  not 
be  claimed  by  Livingston  as  being  included  in  the  Louisiana  Purchase  under  the 
terms  "  with  the  same  extent  that  it  now  has  in  the  hands  of  Spain,  and  that  it  had 
when  France  possessed  it?" 

Based  on  such  reasoning,  Livingston  and  Monroe  wrote  to  Madison  June  7, 

1803: 

We  consider  ourselves  so  strongly  founded  in  this  conclusion  that  we  are  of  opinion  the  United 
States  should  act  on  it  in  all  the  measures  relative  to  Louisiana,  in  the  same  manner  as  if  West  Florida 
was  comprised  within  the  island  of  New  Orleans;  or,  lay  to  the  west  of  the  river  Iberville.  (State 
Papers,  ii,  564-5. ) 


44  THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 

President  Jefferson  was  even  more  radical  than  Livingston,  as  his  letter  to 
William  Dnnbar  explains,  as  follows: 

Washington,  March  13,  1S04. 
To  WiLUAM  DrNnAR,  Esq., 

Dear  , Sir, — Your  favor  of  January  28  has  been  duly  received,  *  *  *  We  were  much  indebted 
for  your  comnuinications  on  the  subject  of  Louisiana  The  substance  of  what  was  received  from  you, 
as  well  as  others,  was  digested  together  and  printed,  without  letting  it  be  seen  from  whom  the  partic- 
ulars came,  as  some  were  of  a  nature  to  excite  ill-will.  Of  these  publications  I  sent  you  a  copy.  On 
the  .subject  of  the  limits  of  Louisiana,  nothing  was  said  therein,  becau.se  we  thought  it  be.st  first  to 
have  explanations  with  Spain.  In  the  first  visit,  after  receiving  the  treaty,  which  I  paid  to  Monticello, 
which  was  in  Augu.st,  I  availed  my.self  of  what  I  have  there,  to  investigate  the  limits.  While  I  was  in 
Europe,  I  had  purchased  everything  I  could  laj'  tny  hands  on  which  related  to  any  part  of  America,  and 
particularly  had  a  pretty  full  collection  of  the  English,  French  and  Spani.sh  authors,  on  the  suVjject  of 
Louisiana.  The  information  I  got  from  the.se  was  entirely  satisfactory,  and  I  threw  it  into  a  shape 
which  would  easily  take  the  form  of  a  memorial.  I  now  enclo.se  you  a  copy  of  it.  One  single  fact  in 
it  was  taken  from  a  publication  in  a  newspaper,  supposed  to  be  written  by  Judge  Bay,  who  had  lived 
in  West  Florida.  This  asserted  that  the  country  from  the  Iberville  to  the  Perdido  was  to  this  day 
called  Louisiana,  and  a  part  of  the  government  of  Louisiana.  I  wrote  to  you  to  ascertain  that  fact, 
and  received  the  information  you  were  so  kind  as  to  send  me;  on  the  receipt  of  which  I  changed  the 
form  of  the  assertion,  so  as  to  adapt  it  to  what  I  suppose  to  be  the  fact,  and  to  reconcile  the  testimony 
I  have  received,  to  wit,  that  though  the  name  and  division  of  West  Florida  have  been  retained;  and  in 
strictness,  that  country  is  still  called  by  that  name  ;  yet  it  is  also  called  Louisiana  in  common  parlance, 
and  even  in  some  authentic  public  documents.  The  fact,  however,  is  not  of  much  importance.  It 
would  only  liave  been  an  ari^iiiitciitinn  ad  homincm.  Although  I  would  wish  the  paper  enclosed 
never  to  be  .seen  bj'  anybody  but  yourself,  and  that  it  should  not  even  be  mentioned  that  the  facts  and 
opinions  therein  .stated  are  founded  in  public  authority,  yet  I  have  no  objections  to'their  being  freely 
advanced  in  conversation,  and  as  private  and  individual  opinion,  believing  it  will  be  advantageous 
that  the  extent  of  our  rights  should  be  known  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  country;  and  that  however  we 
may  compromise  on  our  Western  limits,  we  never  shall  on  the  Eastern.     *    '^    * 

That  James  Madison,  the  Secretary  of  State,  also  seriously  considered  this  view 
may  be  inferred  from  his  instructions  to  Monroe,  of  date  July  29,  1803,  in  which 
he  said: 

Your  inquiries  may  also  be  directed  to  the  question,  whether  any,  and  how  much,  of  what  passes 
for  West  Florida,  be  fairly  included  in  the  territory  ceded  to  us  by  France? 

Later  on  Madison  became  more  positive,  and  he  wrote  Monroe,  April  15, 
1804,  that :  . 

It  is  indispen-sable  that  the  United  States  be  not  precluded  from  such  a  con.struction,  [of  the 
treaty]  first,  because  they  consider  the  right  as  well  founded;  secondly,  and  principallj-,  because  it 
is  known  that  a  great  proportion  of  the  most  valuable  lands  between  the  Mississippi  and  the  Perdido 
have  been  granted  by  Spanish  officers  since  the  cession  was  made  by  Spain.  These  illicit  speculations 
can  not  otherwise  be  frustrated  than  by  considering  the  territory  as  included  in  the  cession  made  by 
Spain, 

Monroe  received  assurances  that  negotiation  for  Florida  could  be  entertained 
for  a  money  consideration,  but  he  replied  that  our  government  having  purchased 
that  territory  once  he  should  not  advise  that  it  be  bought  a  second  time.  Talley- 
rand had  by  this  time  taken  a  very  decided  stand  against  our  claim,  and  now 
united  with  Spain  for  the  Iberville  and  the  Mississippi  as  the  eastern  boundary. 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE.  45 

Pensacola  at  that  time  evidently  marked  the  western  limits  of  Florida  as  they 
understood  it,  as  then  the  place  was  a  fort,  containing  300  Spaniards  from  Vera 
Crnz.     Bancroft  says  in  his  history  (Vol.  Ill,  p.  347): 

This  prior  occupation  is  the  reason  why  afterwards  Pensacola  remained  a  part  of  Florida,  and 
the  dividing  line  between  that  province  and  Ivouisiana  was  drawn  between  the  bays  ol  Pensacola 
and  Mobile. 

This  was  on  the  Perdido  river,  to  which  President  Jefferson  again  referred, 
and  especially  in  his  letter  from  Monticello  to  Mr.  Ikeckenridgc: 

We  have  sojne  claims,  to  extend  on  the  sea  coast  westwardly  to  the  Rio  Nortt-  or  Bravo,  and  better, 
to  go  eastwardly  to  the  Rio  Perdido,  between  Mobile  and  Pensiicola,  the  ancient  boundary  of  Louisiana. 
These  claims  will  be  a  subject  of  negotiation  with  Spain,  and  if,  as  soon  as  she  is  at  war,  we  push  them 
strongly  with  one  hand,  holding  out  a  price  in  the  other,  we  shall  certainly  obtain  the  Ploridas,  and 
all  in  good  time. 

As  will  be  seen,  Jefferson  always  insisted  that  Lonisiana  properly  extended  as 
far  eastward  as  the  Perdido  river,  which  is  situated  between  Mobile  river  and 
Pensacola.  Franquelin's  map  of  1684,  made  direct  from  La  Salle's  own  descrij)- 
tion  of  his  discovery  at  the  time,  gives  reason  for  this  position.  Louis  XIV  also 
claimed  all  this  portion  of  Florida  in  his  grant  to  Crozat  "in  all  the  lands,  pos- 
sessed by  lis,  and  bounded  by  New  Mexico,  and  by  the  lands  of  the  English 
Carolina,  all  the  establishments,  ports,  havens,  rivers,  and  principally  the  port  or 
I'.aven  of  the  Isle  Dauphine,  heretofore  called  ]\Iassacre. "  This  island  is  west- 
ward of  the  mouth  of  Mobile  Bay.  There  is  also  in  evidence  a  letter  from 
De  Tonty  addressed  to  La  Salle,  dated  April  20,  1685.  In  this  he  expresses  his 
great  uneasiness  in  not  having  found  him,  and  says:  "Two  canoes  have  exain- 
ined  the  coast  thirty  leagues  toward  Mexico  and  twenty-five  toward  Florida." 
(Falconer's  Mississippi,  29.)  This  was  eastward  from  the  mouth  of  the  Missis- 
sippi, taking  in  the  coast  and  mouths  of  rivers  claimed  by  Spain  as  West  Florida. 
It  also  indicates  that  La  Salle's  men  recognized  the  country  known  as  Florida, 
but  it  was  much  further  east  than  as  claimed  by  Spain. 


THE   UNITED  STATE.S  DISPOSSESSES  SPAIN. 

After  the  cession  of  1803  the  United  States  insisted  upon  a  more  liberal 
construction  as  to  boundaries,  and  attempted  a  negotiation  with  Spain  at  Madrid 
in  1804.  It  was  contended  that  the  country  west  of  the  Perdido  river,  and  west 
and  south  to  the  river  Bravo  del  Norte,  with  all  the  intermediate  rivers  and  all 
the  countries  drained  by  them  not  previously  acquired  by  the  United  States, 
should  be  included  in  the  terms  of  the  purchase  of  1803  from  France.  The 
Spanish  Government  denied  our  rights  to  any  country  east  and  west  of  the 
Mississippi,  except  as  to  New  Orleans  with  the  country  on  the  east  immediately 
contiguous  to  it,  together  with  the  country  bordering  on  the  west  bank  of  the 
Mississippi.     It  will  be  seen  that  as  to  the  country  directly  east  of  the  island  of 


46 


THE   LOUISIANA    PURCHASE. 


New  Orleans  (which  was  what  Spain  previously  claimed  as  West  Florida)  it  was 
admitted  tliat  our  nation  was  entitled  to  it.  The  attempt  at  negotiation,  however, 
failed. 

Acting  on  the  popular  belief,  Congress,  in  1812,  authorized  the  general 
assembly  of  Louisiana  to  include  in  its  limits  a  portion  of  West  Florida,  in  the 
face  of  the  claims  of  Spain.  Tlie  people  of  Louisiana  persistently  claimed  it 
as  a  part  of  the  Louisiana  Purchase.  The  people  within  the  disputed  territory 
likewise  made  the  same  claim,  and  insisted  on  separate  recognition. 

On  September  26,  1810,  a  declaration  of  independence  from  8i)ain  was  made 
by  the  inhabitants  of  West  Florida,  and  a  copy  sent  to  the  President  of  the  United 
States.  The  first  public  notice,  given  to  the  inhabitants  of  West  F'lorida  of  the 
claim  of  tjie  United  States  to  the  country,  was  the  proclamation  of  President 
Monroe  of  October  27,  18 10,  which  was  accompanied  by  a  force  that  dispossessed 
the  government  o£  Spain.  In  this  proclamation,  the  President  declares  that  the 
question  of  title  shoitld  remain  open  for  negotiation.  Possession  was  taken  by 
Governor  Claibourne,  December  7,  18  ro,  and  this  was  followed  by  the  protest  of 
Mr.  Morier,  British  minister  to  Washington,  against  the  acts  of  the  President. 

The  Congress  of  the  United  States,  acting  upon  the  opinion  that  the  cession 
included  the  territory  west  of  the  Perdido  river,  on  February  24,  1804  (2  Stat., 
251),  passed  an  act  for  laying  and  collecting  duties  in  the  disputed  territor)-.  By 
act  of  March  26,  1804  (2  Stat.,  283),  an  act  was  passed  erecting  Louisiana  into  two 
territories,  the  Territory  of  Orleans  to  contain  the  disputed  territory. 

In  October,  1810,  the  President  issued  his  proclamation  directing  the  governor 
of  Orleans  Territory  to  take  possession  of  the  country  as  far  east  as  the  Perdido. 

April  14,  1812  (2  Stat.,  708),  an  act  was  passed  which  enlarged  the  limits  of 
the  State  of  Louisiana,  and  described  lines  that  include  the  lands  in  controversy. 

May  14,  1812  (2  Stat.,  734),  an  act  was  passed  annexing  the  residue  of  the 
country  west  of  the  Perdido  to  Mississippi  Territory. 

March  3,  1817  (3  Stat.,  371),  Congress  included  a  part  of  the  disputed  terri- 
tory in  the  Territory  of  Alabama. 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  the  political  departments  of  the  government  have 
asserted  the  claina  of  the  United  States  to  such  territory,  and  the  judicial  depart- 
ment followed  in  their  footsteps. 

An  excellent  resum^  of  the  various  treaties  involving  the  lands  in  question  will 
be  found  in  the  case  of  Foster  v.  Neilson  (2  Peters,  253). 

The  opinion  of  Chief  Justice  Marshall  in  this  case  does  not  pass  directly  upon 
the  construction  of  the  treaty  of  1803,  but  decides  the  case  upon  the  ground  that 
the  question  of  ownership  of  the  disputed  territory  had  already  been  determined 
by  the  political  department  of  the  government. 

The  court  says,  referring  to  the  various  acts  of  Congress  and  Executive 
orders: 

After  these  acts  of  sovereign  power  over  the  territory  in  dispute,  asserting  the  American  con- 
struction of  the  treaty  by  which  the  Government  claims  it,  to  maintain  the  opposite  construction  in  its 
own  courts  would  certainly  be  an  anomaly  in  the  history  and  practice  of  nations.     If  those  depart- 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


47 


ments  which  are  intrusted  with  the  foreijjn  intercourse  of  the  iiatioii  wliicli  assert  and  maintain  its 
interests  against  foreiji^n  powers  have  unequivocally  asserted  its  rights  of  dominion  over  a  country  of 
which  it  is  in  possession,  an<l  which  it  claims  under  a  treaty;  if  the  legislature  has  acted  on  the  con- 
struction thus  asserted,  it  is  not  in  its  own  courts  that  this  construction  is  to  be  dcnie<l.  A  question 
like  this  respecting  the  Iwundaries  of  nations  is,  Jis  has  been  truly  siiid,  more  a  political  than  a  legal 
question;  and  in  its  discussion  the  courts  of  every  country  must  respect  the  pronounced  will  of  the 
legislature. 

The  doctrine  of  this  decision  has  been  followed  in  other  cases,  notably  Gar- 
cia z^.  Lee,  12  Peters,  515;  Pollard's  Lessee  e'.  Files,  2  Howard,  591;  United  States 
v.  Reynes,  g  Howard,  127;  United  States  v.  Lynde,  11  Wallace,  632. 

THE   FLORIDA   WARS. 

In  the  war  between  Great  Britain  and  the  United  States  in  1814,  General 
Jackson  was  sent  to  Florida  to  dispossess  the  British  who  had  captnred  the  forts 
at  Pensacola,  and  in  1819  the  same  great  general  again  entered  Florida  and  en- 
gaged in  a  strnggle  with  the  Seminole  Indians.  For  two  hundred  and  fifty  years 
the  Floridas  were  the  subject  of  contention.  At  one  time  it  was  by  the  Spanish, 
at  another  by  the  French,  and  then  by  the  English ;  at  one  time  the  English 
governor  of  Georgia  proceeded  as  far  south  as  St.  Augustine  in  Florida  and 
attempted  to  take  the  fort.  In  later  years  the  Americans  figured  actively  against 
the  Spaniards  and  Indian.s.  The  atrocities  perpetrated  on  the  Florida  battle 
grounds,  between  the  Spaniards  and  the  French,  and  between  each  of  these  and 
the  common  Indian  foe  in  the  earlier  years,  are  perhaps  not  surpassed  in  cruelty 
by  those  of  any  other  portion  of  our  country.  The  time  was  at  last  at  hand  when 
a  new  and  a  better  destiny  was  about  to  have  sway.  Boundary  lines  were  proving 
a  too  feeble  barrier  to  aggressive  and  progressive  Americanism. 


THE   FLORIDA  TREATY. 

Active  and  continuous  negotiations  followed  between  our  government  and 
Spain  ;  finally  that  nation,  already  confronted  by  many  difficulties  at  home  and 
abrorid,  acceded  to  our  demands  for  a  cession  of  the  entire  Floridas,  which,  on 
the  22d  of  February',  1819,  was  accomplished.     The  treaty  provided  that : 

His  Catholic  Majesty  cedes  to  the  United  States  in  full  property  and  sovereignty  all  the  territories 
which  belong  to  him  situated  to  the  eastward  of  the  Mississippi,  known  by  the  name  of  East  and 
West  Floridas. 

Following  our  possession  General  Jackson  was  made  governor  of  the  territory. 
In  after  years  Mr.  Adams,  in  his  Memoirs,  referring  to  this  acquisition  of  territory, 
says: 

I  considered  tlie  signature  of  the  treaty  as  the  most  important  event  in  my  life.  It  was  an  event 
of  magnitude  in  the  history  of  this  Union. 

He  took  much  credit  to  himself  especially  for  th?  diplomacy  which  secured 
Spain's  relinquishment  of  her  claims  on  the  Pacific  north  of  the  forty-second  degree 
of  latitude,  and  ranked  this  of  the  greatest  importance  in  the  settlement  of  the  Ore- 


48  THK   LOUISIANA    I'l'RCHASE. 

gon  question  ;  he  held  that  the  IvOtiisiaiin  Purchase  j^ave  no  claim  to  the  country 
west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains.  The  area  accjuired  by  the  United  States  in  this 
treaty  was  about  44,639,360  acres,  and  the  total  cost,  with  interest,  was  #6,489,768. 
This  includes  the  area  between  the  I'erdido  and  the  Mississippi,  which  was  claimed 
as  a  part  of  the  Louisiana  Purchase.  The  Public  Domain  is  in  error  where  the 
area  of  the  Florida  cession  is  given  as  59,268  square  miles,  or  37,931,520  acres. 
This  is  properly  the  area  of  what  is  now  the  State  of  Florida,  the  cession  having 
been  69,749  square  miles.  There  has  since  been  included  in  the  vStateof  Louisiana 
4,581,  Mississippi  3,600,  and  Alabama  2,31x5,  making  a  total  of  10,481  scpiare  miles. 

OUR  WESTERN   LIMIT  OF  LOUISIANA. 

Our  nation  alwaysclaimed,  as  did  F'rance,  that  the  Louisiana  Purchase  extended 
westward  to  the  Rio  Bravo,  because  of  the  settlement  made  by  La  Salle  when,  on 
his  return  from  France,  failing  to  find  the  mouth  of  the  Mississippi,  he  landed  on 
the  coast  of  what  is  now  Texas ;  therefore,  the  French  always  regarded  the 
mouth  of  the  Del  Norte  as  the  western  limit  of  Louisiana  on  the  (iulf  coast. 
Popple,  an  eminent  English  geographer  at  that  time,  conceded  this  claim  and 
represented  on  his  map  the  Del  Norte  as  the  western  limit  of  Lo.iisiana.  The 
United  States  on  this  ground  claimed  Texas  tip  to  i8ig,  and  then  abandoned  it 
when  Spain  ceded  to  us  the  two  Floridas.  It  was  said  at  the  time  that  the  Span- 
iards prided  themselves  on  their  diplomacy  in  .saving  Texas  by  surrendering  Florida; 
indeed,  there  is  much  truth  in  this  boast,  when  we  know  how  intently  resolved 
our  people  were  to  possess  the  Floridas,  and  hence  we  may  well  infer  how  ready 
they  al.so  were  to  relinquish  very  substantial  claims  in  order  to  acquire  the  long- 
envied  Florida  possessions;  this  view  is  corroborated  by  reference  to  President 
Monroe's  message  to  Congress  December  7,  1819,  concerning  the  treaty  with  Spain 
in  that  year,  wherein  he  says: 

For  territory  ceded  by  Spain  other  territory  of  great  value  (Texas)  to  which  our  claim  was 
believed  to  be  well  founded  was  ceded  by  the  United  States,  and  in  a  quarter  more  interesting  to  her. 

A  quarter  of  a  century  later  on  there  was  still  a  vivid  remembrance  of  our  old 
claim  to  Texas  inider  the  Louisiana  Purchase,  and  when  in  1844  the  annexation 
of  Texas  was  accomplished,  President  Tyler  in  his  message  to  the  Senate  announcing 
the  negotiation  of  that  treaty  said  that  in  event  of  the  approval  of  annexation — 

the  Government  will  have  succeeded  in  reclaiming  a  territory  which  formerly  constituted  a  portion, 
as  is  confidently  believed,  of  its  domain  under  treaty  of  cession  of  1803  by  France  to  the  United  States. 

THE  ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS. 

The  annexation  of  Texas  was  even  more  strenuously  opposed,  and  her  possi- 
bilities more  derided  than  were  those  of  Louisiana ;  yet  to-day  this  State  occupies 
a  conspicuous  place  in  the  sisterhood  of  States.     With  her  annexation  we  gained 


"Ni 


THK   LOl'ISIANA    PrRCIIASK.  49 

376.931  square  miles  to  our  doinaiu.  As  we  look  upon  her  eiUerprisiu);  people, 
her  prosperous  cominunities,  her  spacious  harbors,  her  Kreat  cotton  yield  of 
2,122,701  bales,  valued  at  Sj.\, ^22,(yo.\,  rankinj-;  her  first  anionjj  the  cotton  vStates 
(leavinjj^  (ieor)j;ia  second  and  Mississippi  third);  her  nearly  ^.(kio.ckw)  cattle,  valued 
at  $73,638,656;  her  1,148,500  horses,  valued  at  $19,8^)6,178;  her  2,649.(>i4  sheep, 
valued  at  $4,409,457,  with  iier  annual  crops  of  cereals  and,  fruits,  and  her  rich 
commerce  by  land  and  water — who  does  not  feel  proud  of  the  Texan  annexation, 
and  hold  in  veneration  the  memory  of  the  farsij^hted  and  patriotic  men  who 
brouj^dit  it  about? 

OUR  NATION  CLAIMS  BEYOND  THE  ROCKIES. 

While  the  expedition  of  lycwis  and  Clarke  was  not  conceived  ori<;inally  for 
the  purpose  of  attaininj^  political  ends,  yet  the  disclosures  made  as  to  the  marvel- 
ous country  traversed  by  these  explorers  aroused  a  lively  interest  throughout  our 
nation.  When  finally,  by  the  treaty  of  18 19,  we  .secured  the  claims  of  Spain 
north  of  the  forty-.second  dej^ree  of  latitude,  we  more  than  ever  valued  Ciray's 
discovery  of  the  mouth  of  the  Columbia  and  the  Astoria  settlement,  throujfh 
which  alone  we  deduced  an  almost  incontestable  ri<;ht.  At  last  a  national  interest 
had  .so  crystallized  about  this  romantic  rej^ion  westward  of  the  Rockies  that  soon 
it  was  to  break  forth  in  the  war  cry  of  "I'Mfty-four,  Forty,  or  Fifrht." 

The  restoration  of  the  Astoria  .settlement  (or  Fort  (leorj^e),  on  the  Columbia 
river,  to  the  American.s,  pursuant  to  the  first  article  of  the  treaty  of  Ghent,  was  a 
most  substantial  confirmation  b\'  Great  Hritain  of  the  American  claim  ;  it  was 
also  a  .stinmlus  for  increased  effort  toward  final  recojijnition  of  our  rights.  Nejjo- 
tiations  with  Eni;land  were  resorted  to  by  our  nation,  which  was  represented  by 
Rush  and  Gallatin,  while  Enjjland  was  represented  I)y  Goulbnrn  and  Robinson. 
Our  plenipotentiaries  proposed  that  the  line  should  be  drawn  from  the  north- 
western extremity  of  the  Lake  of  the  Woods,  north  or  south,  as  the  ca.se  mi<i[ht 
require,  to  the  forty-ninth  parallel  of  latitude,  and  thence  along  that  parallel  west- 
ward to  the  Pacific  Ocean.  The  Briti.sh  connni.ssioners  agreed  to  this  line  as  far 
west  as  the  Rocky  Mountains,  but  no  further.  The  Americans  did  not  assert  that 
the  United  States  had  a  perfect  right  to  that  country,  but  insisted  that  their  claim 
was  good  at  least  against  Great  Britain,  and  in  support  of  this  claim  Gray's  dis- 
covery and  our  exploration  and  settlements  were  relied  on.  Against  the.se  the 
British  negotiators  submitted  the  voyage  of  Captain  Cook  and  his  discoveries,  and 
those  of  Vancouver  and  other  English  navigators ;  they  insisted  on  an  exclusive 
right  based  on  snch  claims.  They  finally  indicated,  however,  a  willingness  to 
accept  as  a  boundary  the  Columbia  River,  with  the  joint  right  at  the  mouth  to  a 
harbor.  On  such  proposals  it  was  impossible  to  nnite,  and  accordingly  it  was 
determined  that  for  ten  years  there  should  be  a  joint  occupancy  of  the  country 
without  prejudice  to  the  claims  of  either  nationality.  This  agreement  was  signed 
October  20,  1818,  but  thus  far  no  treaty  had  yet  been  concluded  with  Spain, 

2239 4 


50  THE   LOUISIANA    PURCHASE. 

although  earnest  efforts  were  then  in  projjfress.  The  Spaniards  declined  to  recoj^- 
nize  the  E)n<jlish  or  any  other  claims,  but  contended  for  the  superiority  of  their 
own  claims  on  the  ijronnd  of  Spanish  discoveries  as  well  as  explorations  as  far 
north  on  the  Pacific  as  the  forty-seventh  dejjree  of  latitude;  also  by  virtue  of  the 
expedition  of  San  Juan  de  Fuca  as  far  back  as  1592,  and  of  the  voyaj^es  of  other 
Spanish  navij;;ators  later  on  and  long  prior  to  any  Hritish  explorations  or  even 
expeditions. 

Spain  claimed  the  Californias  and  her  dominion  over  that  portion  of  the  coast 
by  actual  occupancy,  while  her  long-established  claims  to  the  territory  northward 
was  ably  argued  by  the  Spanish  minister. 

It  was  noted  as  significant  that  Mr,  Adams,  our  Secretary  of  vState,  in  his 
negotiations  with  Spain,  refrained  from  any  controversy  as  to  the  Si)anish  claims 
on  the  Pacific  It  was,  however,  deemed  by  our  (Government  an  opportune  time, 
while  adjustnig  with  Spain  our  eastern  boundaries,  also  to  provide  for  the 
strengthening  of  our  claims  to  territory  west  of  the  Rocky  !\Iountains  which,  by 
virtue  of  the  discovery  of  the  mouth  of  the  Columbia  and  its  entrance  by  Captain 
Gray  in  1792,  the  exploration  of  the  same  river  from  its  head  waters  to  tlie  sea  by 
Lewis  and  Clarke  in  1805  and  1806,  and  by  the  .settlement  and  occupancy  of  the 
Astoria  people  in  181 1,  gave  to  our  nation  a  claim  regarded  as  conclusive  against 
every  other  nation  except  Spain,  and,  as  to  her,  of  conceding  the  discovery  and 
settlement  north  of  the  Colinnbia  River,  and  t)ther  discoveries  .southward  on  the 
coast.  It  was  therefore  of  value,  while  settling  our  boundaries,  to  procure  a  relin- 
quishment of  such  claim  as  Spain  might  have  on  that  portion  of  the  continent 
north  of  California,  atul  this  was  .secured  in  the  treaty  of  February  22,  18 19,  and 
is  found  in  Article  III  of  the  treaty,  as  follows: 

Thf  l)(niii(lary  lim.-  l)et\V(.'eii  Iho  two  comitries,  west  of  the  Mississippi,  shall  hfj^iii  on  the  (iulph 
of  Mexico,  at  the  mouth  of  the  River  Sahiiie,  in  tlie  sea,  continuing  north,  alonjjf  the  western  bank  of 
that  river  to  the  thirty-second  <U)free  of  latitude;  thence  liy  a  line  due  north  to  the  decree  of  latitiiile 
where  it  strikes  tlie  Rio  Roxo  of  Nachitoches  or  Red  River;  then  following  the  course  of  the  Kii> 
Roxo  westwanl,  to  the  de)^ree  of  longitude  i(«)  west  from  London  and  2,^  from  \Vashin>j;ton;  then 
crossinji;  the  said  Re<l  River  and  nnniin^!;  thence,  hy  a  line  due  north,  to  the  River  Arkansas;  thence 
following  the  course  of  the  .\rkansas,  to  its  source,  in  latitude  42  north;  and  thence  l)y  that  parallel  of 
latitude  to  the  South  Sea.  *  *  *  lUit  if  the  st)urce  of  the  Arkansas  River  .shall  he  found  to  fall 
north  or  south  of  latitude  42,  then  the  line  sh.ill  run  fron.  the'.source  due  .south  or  north,  a.s  the  case 
may  be,  till  it  nieet.s  the  .said  parallel  to  the  South  Sea;  *     * 

The  forty-.second  parallel  of  latitude  was  easily  conceded  by  Mr.  Adams  to  be 
the  northern  boundary  of  the  Spanish  possessions  on  the  Pacific,  becau.se  of  the 
undoubted  historic  evidences  not  only  of  di.scoveries  on  the  coast  line,  but  of 
actual  exploration  and  settlement  by  Spaniards  to  that  parallel.  North  of  this 
parallel  the  coast  line  as  far  as  the  fifty-sixth  degree  of  latitude  was  discovered 
and  many  parts  explored  and  some  named,  but  the.se  adv.'utages  were  not  followed 
up  by  occupation  and  settlement,  and  hence  in  favor  of  the  Americans  the  Spani.sh 
government  .seemed  willing  to  relinquish  its  prior  claim  to  all  territory  north  of 
the  forty-second  degree. 


THK   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


51 


\Vc  thus  closed  an  account  with  :i  troublesome  rival.  A  conclusion  was 
reached,  and  what  has  since  been  known  as  the  Florida  treaty  was  sijjned.  Our 
southern  boundaries  were  at  last  aj^reed  upon,  tojijether  with  a  cession  of  Spain's 
claim  to  all  the  country  on  the  Pacific  north  of  the  forty-second  parallel  of  lati- 
tude, and  President  Monroe  made  his  announcement  of  this  fact  to  Congress  on 
the  same  day. 

orR   NATION  CONTKSTS  THK   CI.AIMh  OK   KXr.I.ANI)  ON   THK    PACIKIC. 

Following  this  treaty  a  resolution  passed  the  House  of  Representatives  pro- 
viding: "That  an  inquiry  should  be  made  as  to  the  situation  of  the  .settlements 
on  the  Pacific  Ocean,  and  as  to  the  expediency  of  occupying  the  Columbia  river." 
This  was  in  Decendjer,  1820.  The  report  which  this  resolution  invited  is  in 
several  respects  a  remarkable  document.  It  claims  for  our  coinitry  all  the  territory 
from  the  forty-second  degree  as  far  north  as  the  fifty-third  degree.  It  bases  our 
rights  not  only  on  di.scovery  and  exploration,  and  through  the  Florida  treaty,  but 
advances  our  claim  for  the  first  time  from  high  authority  ba.sed  on  the  Louisiana 
Purchase.  The  fur  trade  is  referred  to  as  a  traffic  of  great  value;  a  future  indus- 
try in  the  fisheries  is  predicted;  trading  jiosts  are  reconniiended  and  immigration 
favored. 


RUSSIA'S    CLAIM    ACKNOWLEDGED. 

In  the  meantime  Russia  was  taking  measures  to  define  its  boundaries  in  the 
Northwest,  and  proclamation  of  the  l^mperor  was  made  claiming  all  north  of  the 
fifty-first  parallel.  A  joint  convention  folh)wed  between  our  government  and  that 
of  Russia,  .\])ril  5,  1S24,  at  St.  Petersburg,  by  which  it  was  provided  that  in  future 
our  citizens  should  form  no  establishments  north  of  54°  40'  north  latitude,  and  that 
the  Ru.ssians  should  form  none  south  of  that  parallel.  Ivngland  subsequently 
entered  into  an  agreement  with  Russia  by  which  it  was  .stipulated  that  the  boundary 
line  between  the  possessions  of  these  two  ])owers  should  be  as  follows: 

Comiiu'iiciii};  from  tlir  soutliiTiiiiioAt  jioint  of  tlic-  island  ralk-tl  I'riiiri'  of  Walt's  Island,  wliii-h 
point  lies  in  tin-  parallol  of  5.;"  40'  north  latitiuU',  ami  bttwi'iMi  tlio  oui-  luimlrod  and  thirty-first  and 
one  hundrt'd  and  thirty-third  (U'Krtv  of  wi-st  lon^itnik'  (nicridiaii  of  Cirrcnwioh),  the  said  line  shall 
ascend  to  the  north  alon^  the  eliainiel  oalU'cl  I'ortland  Channel  as  far  as  the  point  of  the  I'ontinent 
where  it  striki's  thi'  lifty-sixth  de.v^ri'c  of  north  latitude;  from  this  last-mentioned  point  the  line  of 
deniareation  shall  follow  the  summit  of  the  mouptains  sitnated  parallel  to  the  eoast  as  far  as  the  |)oint 
of  intersection  of  tlu' one  hundred  and  fortv-lirsi  dej;ree  of  west  lonj,'itilde  (<)f  the  Siime  meridian); 
and  finally,  from  the  Siiid  point  of  interseclicni,  the  said  nuridian  line  of  the  one  hundred  and  forty- 
first  deforce  in  its  prolonj,'ation  as  far  as  the  frozen  ocean.  *  *  »  That  whenever  the  snmniil  of  the 
mountains  which  extend  in  a  direction  ))arallel  to  the  eoast  from  the  fifty-sixth  decree  of  nortli  latitude 
to  the  point  of  intersection  of  the  one  linndri'd  and  forty-first  dejjree  of  west  lon^;itude  shall  ])rove  to 
he  at  the  distance  of  more  than  ten  marine  Ica^jues  from  the  ocean,  the  limit  lietween  the  llritish 
possessions  and  the  line  of  coast  which  is  to  helonj;  to  Russia,  as  above  mentioned  (that  is  to  siiy,  the 
limit  to  the  possessions  ceded  by  this  convention  ),  shall  he  formed  by  a  line  parallel  to  the  winding  of 
the  coast,  and  which  shall  never  e.xceed  the  di.stance  of  ten  marine  leagues  therefrom.     *     *    « 


52 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


RUSSIA   SELLS  ALASKA   TO  TUK    I'MTKn  STATKS. 


This  description  was  later  made  the  basis  in  the  nej^otiations  between  Rnssia 
and  the  United  States  for  the  sale  of  the  Russian  possessions,  known  as  Alaska, 
to  the  United  States,  and  which  resulted  in  the  treaty  concluded  March  20,  1867. 
Andrew  Johnson  was  then  President,  and  William  H.  Seward  was  Secretary-  of 
State.  The  consideration  paid  by  the  United  States  was  $7,200,000;  and  the  area 
acquired  was  369,529,600  acres,  at  a  price  per  acre  of  about  2  cents.  Russia's 
claim  to  this  country  was  based  on  discovery.  Captain  Behrinj;  discovered 
the  mainland  of  North  America  on  the  iSth  of  July,  1741,  and  his  associate 
e\;lorer,  Tschiriknow,  in  another  vessel  discovered  many  of  the  islands  of  the 
Aleutian  Archipela<:;o.  Lower  down  the  coast  Vancouver  made  discovery  in  1790 
of  what  is  now  British  Columbia,  and  upon  this,  Enjj^land  based  her  claim  as  far 
north  as  the  Russian  possessions,  in  opposition  to  the  claim  of  the  .Vmericans  that 
far  north  based  on  Captain  Gray's  discovery  of  the  mouth  of  the  Columbia  in  1792. 

As  another  instance  of  profitable  purchase,  we  are  well  justified  when  we 
refer  to  our  investment  in  Alaska,  and  it  is  anuisinj;  to  be  reminded  of  the  ])opular 
opinion  entertained  when  the  purchase  was  made  as  to  its  utter  worthlessness.  In 
view  of  recent  extraordinary  developments  in  that  country  it  will  be  of  special 
interest  now  to  quote  some  of  the  opinions  of  eminent  statesmen  in  Conj^fress  when 
the  purchase  was  under  consideration  by  that  body,  July  i,  1868: 

Mr.  Orange  Ferriss,  of  New  York,  said: 

The  people  of  this  country  do  not  want  these  Russian  possessions.  If  sul)niitte(l  to  thetn  they 
would  reject  the  treaty  by  a  majority  of  millions,  .\laska,  with  the  Aleutian  Islands,  is  an  inhos- 
pitable, wretched,  and  God-fors;iken  region,  worth  nothing,  but  a  positive  injury  anil  incumbrance  as 
a  colony  of  the  United  States. 


I  tell  gentlemen  who  go  for  Alaska  that 


Mr.  Wa.shburne,  Wisconsin,  said: 

The  country  is  ab.solutely  without  value.     *     ■'■ 
Greenland  to-day  is  a  better  purcha.se  than  Alaska.     »    *    * 

Mr.  Hiram  Price,  Iowa,  said: 

Now  that  we  have  got  it  and  can  not  give  it  away  or  lo.se  it,  I  hoj)e  we  will  keep  it  under  military 
rule  and  get  along  with  as  little  expense  as  possible.  It  is  a  deail  lo.ss  to  us  anyway,  and  the  more 
expen.se  we  incur  the  worse  it  is  for  the  country  and  the  people. 

Mr.  H.  F.  Hutler,  Massachusetts,  July  7,  1868,  .said: 

If  we  are  to  pay  for  her  [Ru.ssia's]  frienilshij)  this  amount,  I  desire  to  give  her  the  ;(t7, 200,000  and 
let  her  keep  .Alaska.  *  *  *  j  have  no  doubt  that  any  time  within  the  last  twenty  years  we  could 
have  had  .\laska  for  the  asking.  1  have  heard  it  was  so  .stated  in  the  Cabinets  of  two  Presidents,- 
provided  we  would  have  taken  it  as  a  gift.  Hut  no  man,  except  one  insane  enough  to  buy  the  earth- 
quakes in  St.  Thomas  and  the  ice  fields  in  Greeidand,  could  be  found  to  agree  to  any  other  tenns  for 
its  acquisition  to  the  country. 

Mr.  Benjamin  F.  Loan,  of  Missouri,  said: 

The  acquisition  of  this  inhospitable  and  barren  waste  would  never  add  one  dollar  to  the  wealth 
of  our  country  or  furnish  homes  to  our  i)eople.     To  sup]M).se  that  anyone  would  willingly  leave  the 


--^1 


155' 


160 


les" 


170'^ 


I7S' 


180' 


175° 


n    '     /     /     /   X    ^ ■  ^-   /    /   /V   /  / 


/v///'/'X/v.. 


62 


X  /  . 


z"^.   / 


/   / 


/  / 


M 


K/  r- 


< 


/  „'  X 


se 


I 


\  '^i^^ 


w< 


/.../'    /'    /-/■ 


r- 


'•«•*, 


/■^xxm 


?^X  /  T 


»*/ 


I    ''Uy 


-/-J 


/ 


V. 


V 


-.  / 


/^V.   /   /   /• 


/-    y     , 
■■■/      /    /^-^     / 


/      / 


.'  /->/ 


y 


/  ~7 


7-77/ 


fi ' 


to 


W 


''-,.••■    /  7-7  /  X-7  /  /  7-A/  <?      / 


7  77-7./  '  7 


7'    ;    •4-«.-V    /T/-/// 


/ 


■4     '^. 


^^^Jl^ 


>  ^-^  /'     /    /    ■ 


-A- J 

/     /     /    7^-* 


/- 


/ 


/ 


170  

"7  ^ 


I6S° 


160' 


155' 


ISO  ' 


;    ,    /   ' 


I4i"  140  135  130'  125°  120 ' 


n 


^  / 


V"' 


7 


^"""^'d^/-^ 


^w  /  7  J  t^wvr^---  ■  -   •  •-  / 


..:\ 


■  V 


u^.>«-3%'  -''**'^' LJr 


li**: 


1  '  \ 


X 


^i*!      I 


•0 


56" 


i        1 


\        I 


-f-i 


r 


160^ 


[4 

■44-4  -I  r- 


-f-, 


I        ! 


L:-t--- 


ALASKA 

C 1  Reported  gold  discoven&s. 

.  [7~~~1  Cbfl'/  deposits . 

EliS  Copper  deposits. 

\     Q  Z.a/7a'  Offices. 

i  i  ZG/7cy  district  boundaries. 

1—   -_^     O  Capita/,  Surveyor  General's  Office 

\  j  Routes  to  interior. 

Proposed  Railroads- 


VKOii   *-' 


,-^—- r^ 


(^ 


155" 


ISO" 


145 


140" 


us-^ 


52 


^ 


i»^ii    u, 


.:> 


^       \ 


^^^'x: 


\ 

*■»''». 


/./l^/., !/ 


,ii' ■.■■'>■■»'■). 


>!i^- 


# 


u4-4 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


53 


tnild  clinidtu  and  fruitful  soil  of  the  l''nite(l  States  with  its  newsiiaptTs  and  churches,  its  railroads  and 
commerce,  its  civilization  and  refinement,  to  surk  a  home  ainon^j  the  Aleuts  *  *  *  is  simply  to 
suppose  such  person  insane. 

Mr.  Williams,  of  Pennsylvania,  said: 

Have  the  people  desired  it?  [The  purchase  of  Alaska.]  Not  a  sensible  man  amonj^  thetn  had 
ever  su>{>jested  it.  The  whole  country  e.xclainie<l  at  once,  when  it  was  niaile  known  to  it,  against  the 
iueffahle  folly,  if  not  the  wanton  proflijracy,  of  the  whole  transaction.  There  is  no  man  here,  I  think, 
who  would  have  advised  it.  I  doubt  whether  there  are  twenty  in  tliis  House  who  would  be  williuK  to 
vote  for  it  \u>\>,  but  for  the  single  reason  that  the  contract  has  been  made. 

Mr.  Wasliburnc,  of  Illinoi.s,  January  13,  i86g  (after  the  Territory  had  been 
purchased,  speaking  on  the  bill  to  provide  a  government  for  the  same),  said: 

The  accounts  which  we  receive  froni  that  Territory  of  the  sickness  and  sufferinjr  of  the  people 
who  are  sent  there  show  conclusively  that  it  will  never  be  inhabited  to  any  considerable  extent  by 
white  men. 

Mr.  Ferriss,  New  York,  speaking  on  the  same  bill,  moved  to  strike  out  all 
after  the  enacting  clause  and  insert  the  following: 

That  the  Presi<lent  be  authorized  to  bind  the  United  States  by  treaty  to  pay  the  sum  of  I7, 200,000 
to  any  respectable  Kuropeau,  Asiatic,  or  African  jwwer  which  will  accept  a  cession  of  the  Territory  of 
Alaska. 

Such  was  the  unfavorable  estimate  placed  upon  this  purchase,  containing 
577,390  square  miles  of  territory.  Hut  thirty  years  have  since  elap.sed.  Already 
such  an  exhibit  is  made  of  the  present  value  as  well  as  of  the  magnificent  possi- 
bilities of  that  region,  as  to  occasion  wonder  that  any  doubt  .should  have  l)een 
entertained  as  to  the  advisability  of  the  purchase.  The  gold  ])roduction  of  last 
year  amounted  to  $2,439,otx5,  while  the  total  gold  output  since  our  purchase  is 
estimated  to  have  been  nearly  $15,000,000,  or  more  than  twice  the  amount  paid  for 
Alaska.  One  single  mine,  the  Treadwell,  on  Douglas  Island,  has  had  an  average 
annual  output  for  some  years  of  $800,000 — has  paid  to  its  stockholders  up  to  1896 
a  total  sum  of  $6,625,945.  Since  the  development  of  mines  on  the  Yukon  and  its 
tributaries  fabulous  returns  may  be  expected  in  the  next  and  following  years. 

As  showing  the  con.staut  iucrea.se  in  the  Ala.skan  gold  yield,  I  present  the 
following  figures,  furnished  by  the  Director  of  the  Mint: 

/'iV(/iii/iou  0/  oolJ  in  .Uaska  shict'  /SSo. 


Year. 


lS«o. 
iSSl 
I8S2 
1SS3 
1884 
IS8.S 
1886 
1887 

1888 


15,000 
.  I. so,  000 
300,  (X)0 
200.000 
300.000 

446,  OCX) 

67.S,  CXX> 
850, 000 


Year. 


Amount. 


1S89, 
1890 
1891 
1S92 
1S9.V 
1S94 

1S9.S 
1S96 
1897 


5900. 000 

762.  UX) 

yoo,  000 

I,  000.  0(X) 

I.  010,  KX) 

1,  ll.v.S.SO 
l.ftlS,  ,V*' 

2,  055,  700 

2,  4,(9,  000 


' 


54 


THE   LOUISIANA    PURCHASE. 


THE   FISH   OF   ALASKA. 

In  1897  the  fish  product  was  vahied  at  $2,977,019.  Not  only  salmon,  but 
cod,  halibut  and  herring  abound.  In  1897,  34  canneries  and  14  salteries  e.xported 
1,086,650  cases  and  15,888  barrels  of  fish.  The  tin  alone  con.siuued  in  these  can- 
neries is  valued  at  about  half  a  million  dollars.  In  response  to  an  inquir\-  addressed 
to  the  United  States  Commission  of  Fish  and  Fisheries,  the  honorable  Commis- 
sioner replied  with  the  following  most  interesting  statement: 

Complying  with  your  request  for  an  approximate  statement  of  the  aggregate  vahie  of  the  Alaskan 
fisheries  since  the  purchase  of  the  Territory,  I  have  based  an  estimate  on  the  best  figures  available, 
although  for  many  of  the  years  only  very  nieager  data  are  obtainable.  The  total  value  of  these  fish- 
eries, excluding  the  whale  fishery  prosecuted  in  Alaskan  waters  by  vessels  from  San  I'rancisco,  appears 
to  have  been  about  )|t67,890,cxK).  It  is  possible  that  this  sum  is  as  much  as  10  per  cent  above  or  below 
the  actual  amount. 

This  opportunity  is  taken  to  draw  your  attention  to  the  remarkable  productiveness  of  the  Alaskan 
waters  as  regards  salmon.  During  the  fifteen  years  that  have  elapsed  since  the  inauguration  of  wdmon 
canning,  7,065,422  cases  of  salmon,  each  containing  4.S  one-pound  cans,  and  I44,(xx)  barrels  of  salt 
sjilmon  have  been  prepared.  The  gross  weight  of  the  fish  thus  utilized  was  610,995,640  pounds,  and 
the  market  value  of  the  output  was  about  $30,000,000. 

THE  ALASKAN   FUR  SEALS. 

The  fur  industry  has  long  been  a  most  lucrative  traffic,  and  China  for  many 
years  was  the  place  of  shipment  and  market.  Captain  Cook,  in  one  of  his  voyages, 
touched  at  Unalaska  in  1776,  where  he  found  the  Russians  even  at  that  early  day. 
In  mentioning  this  circumstance,  he  says: 

There  are  Russians  upon  all  the  principal  islands  between  Unala.ska  and  Kamschatka  for  the  sole 
purpose  of  collecting  furs.    Their  great  object  is  the  sea  beaver  and  otter. 

The  Alaska  Commercial  Company  possessed  a  monopoly  of  the  fur-seal  indus- 
try under  a  twenty  years'  lease  from  our  Government,  and  at  its  expiration,  in  1890, 
the  company  had  paid  into  the  United  States  Treasury  about  $6,000,000.  The  fur 
sales  by  this  one  company  are  estimated  to  have  equaled  $33,000,000.  The  North 
American  Commercial  Company,  under  its  twenty  years'  lease,  beginning  April  i, 
1890,  paid  $340,395,  and  there  is  claimed  from  said  company  the  further  sum  of 
$1,134,553  on  account  of  the  same  lease,  for  the  privilege  of  taking  fur-.seal  skins 
on  the  Pribilof  Islands.  This  one  item  of  fur  seals,  then,  represents  a  value  inuring 
to  the  United  States  Treasury  exceeding  the  entire  price  paid  Russia  for  all  of 
Alaska. 

UNITED  STATES   LAND   DISTRICTS. 

Three  land  districts  are  now  created  there,  with  offices  at  Sitka,  Circle,  and 
Nulatto,  and  Congress  has  recently  extended  the  public-land  laws,  with  certain 
modifications,  to  that  Territory. 

This,  then,  is  the  Alaskan  domain,  with  an  extreme  length  of  2,000  miles,  and 
larger  in  area  than  the  thirteen  original  States,  and  for  this  domain  our  government 


William  H.  Seward. 


THP:   LOUISIANA    PURCHASE.  55 

paid  2  cents  per  acre.  This  is  the  Alaska  for  which  the  j^reat  Secretary  vSeward 
suffered  innch  criticism.  He  lived,  however,  to  see  substantial  evidence  of  the 
value  of  his  purchase,  and  confidently  predicted  that  the  future  would  demon- 
strate its  exceedinj,'  importance  to  our  country.  In  his  last  days  he  fondly  and 
often  referred  to  this  purchase.  A  friend  at  this  time  said  to  him:  "Mr.  Seward, 
what  do  you  consider  the  most  important  measure  of  your  political  career?" 
"The  purchase  of  Alaska,"  he  .said,  "but  it  will  take  the  people  a  generation 
to  find  it  out." 

JOINT  OCCUPANCY  AND  NEGOTIATION. 

President  Monroe,  and  after  him  President  Adams,  continued  to  call  the 
attention  of  Congress  to  the  necessity  for  military  posts  on  the  Pacific  within  our 
claim,  and  each  time  the  discussions  in  Congress  elicited  more  valuable  informa- 
tion respecting  the  country,  its  productiveness,  its  climatic  advantages  and  its 
future  commercial  importance  to  the  nation. 

The  ten-year  period,  provided  for  joint  occupancy  with  Great  Rritain  on  the 
Pacific,  being  about  to  expire,  negotiations  between  our  government  and  that 
nation  were  renewed,  and  both  nations  repeated  their  previous  offers,  with  .some 
modifications  by  both  parties.  Mr.  (iallatin  insisted  for  the  line  of  the  fortv- 
ninth  degree,  while  the  British  named  the  Columbia  River,  with  the  right  of 
navigation,  though  they  were  also  willing  to  add  .some  detached  territory  from 
Bullfinches  Harbor  to  the  Straits  of  Fuca,  and  from  the  Pacific  to  Hoods  Channel. 

The  British  ultimatum  was  in  the  following  language : 

The  boundary  line  between  the  territories  claimed  by  His  Britinnic  Majesty  and  those  claimed 
by  the  United  States  to  the  west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains,  shall  be  drawn  due  west  alonjc  the  forty- 
ninth  parallel  of  north  latitude  to  the  point  where  that  parallel  strikes  the  jjreat  northeasternmost 
bninch  of  the  Oregon  or  Columbia  River— marked  in  the  maps  as  McGillivrays  River— thence  down 
alonj;  the  middle  of  the  Oregon  or  Columbia  to  its  junction  with  the  Pacific  Ocean,  the  navigation  of 
the  whole  channel  being  perpetually  free  to  the  subjects  and  citizens  of  both  parties. 

THE   MYSTERY   OK  THE   FGRTY-XIXTH   PARALLEL. 

It  seems  incomprehensible  that  our  early  statesmen  should  differ  so  radically 
as  to  the  northern  parallel  claimed  by  us  as  a  boundary  from  the  Rocky  Moun- 
tains to  the  Pacific,  some  claiming  the  fortv-ninth  parallel  and  otlicrs  claiming 
54°  40'. 

The  evidonces  which  I  shall  present  impel  me  to  the  conclusion  that  our 
inconsistent  claims  result  largely  from  a  mistaken  belief  as  to  what  occurred 
pursuant  to  the  treaty  of  Utrecht.  As  has  been  seen  by  the  reading  of  the  letter 
of  Mr.  Jefferson  to  Mr.  Mellish,  he  states  that  "France  and  England  agreed  to 
appoint  commissioners  to  settle  the  boundary  between  their  pos.sessions, "  and  that 
"those  commissioners  settled  it  at  the  forty-ninth  degree  of  latitude."  Hence  he 
concludes  that  such  parallel  became  the  northern  boundary  of  Louisiana,  this 
territory  being  then  a  possession  of  France. 


56 


THK    LOUISIANA    I'l'RCIIASK. 


(i 


As  tothcorij^inalcrnirand  tlic  evidences  in  explanation,  I  submit  the  following 
very  interestin)^  data  : 

(Kxtrni't   friiiM    '  I'liperx    rmtierliiiK   the  iMiiiucl^irv  i)f  tlu-  fmU-il    Stairs,  ilrlivrrril   to  l,oril  Miirniwliy  Sfiitciiilier  5, 

iSft4, '•  by  Mr.  Monroi-.  | 

Hy  till'  tfiith  iirtioK-  of  tlu-  troiity  nf  rtri'cht  [171.^).  it  is  !ij;rfi'il  "tliat  I'miice  .shall  ri'Slf)rf  to 
Great  Mritaiii  llu'  bay  and  straits  of  lliulsoti.  tonrtluT  with  all  lamls,  .si'as.  suacoa.sts,  riviTs,  and  ])laci'.s 
situate  in  the  said  hay  and  .straits  which  Ik-Iouk  thereto,"  ite. 

It  is  also  a^reeil  "that  eotiiniissaries  shall  he  forthwith  a|)])ointeil  liy  eai'h  I'ower  to  determine, 
within  a  year,  the  limits  between  the  said  bay  of  Hudson  and  the  places  ajiperlainin^;  to  the  I'Veneh  ; 
and  also  to  describe  and  settle,  in  like  manner,  thi'  lioundaries  ln-'tween  the  other  Mritish  and  I'Vench 
colonies  in  those  parts." 

Commissaries  were  accordinjfly  ap]Kiinted  by  each  I'ower,  who  executed  the  stipulations  of  the 
treaty  in  estat)lishinK  the  boni*laries  proposed  by  it.  They  fixed  the  northern  boundary  of  Canada  and 
Louisiana  by  a  line  beKinnin).;  on  the  .\tlantic,  at  a  cape  or  promontory  in  ,sS°  v>'  north  latitude; 
thence,  southwestwardly,  to  the  lake  Mislasin;  thence,  further  southwest,  to  the  latitude  49°  north 
from  the  ecpiator,  and  alonj;  that  line  indefinitely. 

At  the  time  this  treaty  was  formed  I'rance  ]H>s.sessed  Canada  and  Louisiana,     *    »    * 

By  the  fourth  article  of  the  treaty  of  176^,  I'rance  ceded  to  Creat  Hritain  Canada,  Nova  Scotia, 
&c.,  in  the  north;  and,  by  the  seventh  article,  thi  bay  and  i)ort  of  .Mobile,  and  all  the  territory  which 
.she  pos.sessed  to  the  left  of  the  Missis.sippi,  except  the  town  and  island  of  New  Orleans. 

Hy  the  seventh  article  it  was  al.so  stipulated,  that  a  line  to  be  drawn  alonj;  the  middle  of  the 
Mississi])pi,  from  its  .source  to  the  river  Il)erville,  and  thence  alou>;  the  middle  of  that  river,  and  the 
lakes  Maurepas  and  Tontchartrain,  to  the  sea,  should  be  the  boundary  between  the  British  territory  to 
the  eastward,  and  Louisiana  to  the  west.  .\t  that  time  it  was  understood,  as  it  has  been  ever  since, 
till  very  lately,  that  the  Mi.ssis.si])pi  took  its  .source  in  .some  mountain  at  least  as  high  north  as  the 
forty-ninth  <le>;ree  of  north  latitude. 

By  the  treaty  of  17S3,  l)etween  the  I'nited  States  and  (ireat  Britain  the  boundary  Iietween 
*  *  *  to  the  Lake  of  the  Woocls,  and  throujjh  that  lake  to  the  northwestern  point  thereof;  thence, 
a  due  west  course,  to  the  Missis.sippi.     *     *    * 

By  joining,  then,  the  western  boundary  of  Canada  to  its  northern  in  the  Lake  of  the  Woods,  and 
closing  both  there,  it  follows  that  it  was  the  obvious  intention  of  the  ministers  who  negotiated  the 
treaty,  and  of  their  respective  (iovernnieiits,  that  the  rnite<l  States  should  ])ossess  all  the  territory 
lying  between  the  lakes  and  the  Mississippi,  south  of  tlie  jjarallel  of  the  forty-ninth  degree  of  north 
latitude.  This  is  confirmed  by  the  courses  which  are  afterwards  i)ursue<l  by  the  treaty,  since  they  are 
precisely  those  which  had  been  establi.shed  between  Great  Britain  and  France  in  former  treaties.  By 
running  due  west  from  the  northwestern  point  of  the  Lake  of  the  Woods  to  the  Mississi])j)i,  it  nui.st 
have  been  intended,  according  to  the  lights  before  them,  to  take  the  parallel  of  the  forty-ninth  <legree 
of  latitude  as  established  under  the  treaty  of  Utrecht ;     *     *     * 

jVo  evidence  adopting  the  forty-ninth  parallel. — Mr.  Monroe  does  not  give  his 
anthority  for  this  as.sertion  respecting  the  adoption  of  the  forty-ninth  parallel  by 
the  commissaries  under  the  treaty  of  Utrecht  in  17 13,  but  it  is  presumed  to  have 
been  based  on  instructions  from  Mr.  Jefferson,  as  he  makes  the  same  as.sertion  in 
his  correspondence  with  others,  and  especially  in  his  letter  of  December  31,  1816, 
to  Mr.  Mellish,  the  geographer,  to  which  I  have  referred. 

Mr.  Jefferson  does  not  appear  to  have  consulted  the  opinions  of  any  of  the 
many  eminent  persons  well  qualified  in  every  respect  to  throw  light  on  the  sub- 
ject, or  to  have  searched  the  archives  of  any  nation,  but  to  have  drawn  his  own 
conclusions  and  opinions  as  to  the  boundaries  of  Louisiana,  by  consulting  the 
few  works  in  his  limited  library  at  Monticello,  as  will  be  seen  by  his  letters  to 


THK    I.Ol'ISIAXA    PIRCHASK. 


57 


Dnponcfait,  Duiihar,  Moiimt',  and  oIIrts  in  iSo^  and  1.S04,  and  then  hv  ])r()ninl- 
gatcd  his  views  in  the  forni  of  a  memoir. 

The  treaty  of  I'treciit  was  made  principally  to  define  the  boiindarics  between 
the  I'Vench  and  ICii<jlish  possessions  in  North  America,  and  amonjj^  others  the 
honndary  between  the  I'rench  possessions  of  Canada  and  Lonisiana  and  the  terri- 
tory of  the  Iltidson  Hay  Coni])any,  then,  the  only  land  nnder  Mritish  control  in 
that  part  of  the  conntry.  'IMie  forty-ninth  parallel  was  ne\er  mentioned  as  a 
boundary  in  any  treaty  or  convention  nntil  this  assertion  of  Mr.  Monroe  in  his 
letter  to  Lord  Marrowby  of  Septeml)er  5^  11^04;  in  fact,  its  first  appearance  in  any 
ratified  treaty  is  that  of  the  convention  of  October  20,  iKi.S. 

Moth  Mr.  Jefferson  and  Mr.  Monroe  appear  to  have  taken  it  for  jrranted  that 
becan.se  the  treaty  called  for  the  ap])ointnient  of  commis.saries  they  were  really 
ai)pointed,  and  had  actnally  marked  the  line  of  the  forty-ninth  jjarallel,  and 
both  insisted  on  the  correctness  of  their  statement.  The  ICnj^lish  anthorities, 
mnch  better  informed  on  this  subject,  and  perfectly  aware  that  the  forty-ninth 
l)arallel  had  never  before  been  mentioned  as  a  boundary  line,  and  al.so  aware  that 
the  southwest  boundary  of  the  Hudson  Hay  Company's  territory  was  the  northern 
line  of  Louisiana,  (piietly  jum])ed  at  the  proposal,  and  made  no  attempt  to  contro- 
vert this  as.sertion,  made  by  Mr.  Monroe,  thereby  j^aininj;  all  the  territory  between 
the  forty-ninth  parallel  and  the  northwest  point  of  the  Lake  of  the  Woods  (about 
36  miles),  as  the  boundary  would,  by  ri<>;ht,  have  followed  the  heiy;ht  of  land 
definin.tj  the  southern  limits  of  the  territory  of  the  Hudson  Ha\  Company  as 
jjiven  in  the  ()ri<;[inal  charter. 

Jeffery\s  map  of  1762,  showinj.j  the  southern  boundary  as  described  above,  is 
reproduced  in  the  "  Report  on  the  boundaries  of  Ottawa,  1873,"  a  report  of  a  spe- 
cial committee  appointed  by  the  Dominion  Parliament  to  iiupiire  into  the  disjMited 
boundaries  of  Ottawa  and  Manitoba. 

Relative  to  the  statement  in  rejjard  to  the  commis.saries  under  the  treaty  of 
Utrecht  markinj;  the  forty-ninth  parallel,  I  have  since  found  the  following-  in  the 
Notes  ui)on  the  Foreijj^n  Treaties  of  the  United  States,  etc.,  by  John  H.  Haswell, 
of  the  Department  of  State,  January,  iSSg,  pa}j;e  1324: 

ThtTf  i.s  no  evidence,  either  in  the  I'rench  or  Hritish  archives,  of  the  appointment  of  a  boundary 
cotntnission  under  the  treaty  of  I'trecht;  and  in  a  nieinorial  of  the  Hudson  Hay  Cotn])any,  niarkeil  as 
received  Aujjust  13,  1719,  it  is  stated  that  "the  r\innin){  of  a  line  l)etwixt  the  I-lnj^lish  and  I'rench 
territories  yet  remained  t»  he  done."     (Mr.  Hancroft  to  Mr.  I'ish.  Sept.  1,  1S73.     MS.  Dept.  of  State. ) 

This  view  is  further  confirmed  by  Mr.  (ireenhow,  who  says: 

The  conclusion  wouUi  be  undeniable,  if  the  i)remi.ses  on  which  it  is  founded  were  correct.  The 
tenth  article  of  the  treaty  of  Utrecht  does  certainly  stipulate  that  coinmis.saries  should  be  appointed 
by  the  j^overnments  of  Great  Britain  and  I'rance,  respectively,  to  tletennine  the  line  of  separation 
between  their  posses.sions  in  the  northern  part  of  .\nierica  above  specified  ;  and  there  is  reason  to 
believe  that  jK-rsons  were  commissioned  for  that  object:  /'///  ///<vv'  is  no  rz'idi'niY  h'/iir/t  am  he  admitted 
as  t'stablishiuff  the /act  that  a  line  ninnini;  aloiiff  thr  forty-ninth  parallt'l  0/  latitude,  or  any  other  line, 
was  ever  adopted,  or  even  proposed,  by  those  commissaries,  or  by  their  governments,  as  the  limit  of  any 
pail  of  the  French  possessions  on  the  north,  and  of  the  />ritish  Hudson's  Bay  territories  on  the  south. 


58  THE   LOUISIANA    Pl'RCHASK. 

It  is  true  that  on  sonic  maps  of  northern  America,  puhlished  ahont  the  middle 
of  the  hist  century,  a  line  drawn  ah)njj  the  forty-ninth  parallel  does  ap])ear  as  a 
part  of  the  be  .mlary  between  the  French  possessions  and  the  Hudson  Hay  terri- 
tories, as  settled  accordinjj;  to  the  treaty  of  Utrecht.  Hut  on  other  maps,  which 
are  deservedly  held  in  higher  estimation,  n  ilifftrciit  lini\  Jollira'iuir  the  course  of 
the  hii^hlandi  eneire/ini^  Hudson  lia\\  is  presented  as  the  limit  of  the  Hudson 
Hay  territory,  ajjreeable  to  the  same  treaty;  and  in  other  majis  enjoyinj^  etiual 
if  not  ji;reater  consideration  published  under  the  immediate  direction  of  the 
British  jjoverninent,  no  line  sefinrotim;  those  liritish  possessions  front  Louisiana 
or  Canada  is  to  he  seen. 

In  the  other  works,  political,  historical,  and  jjjeoj^rajiliical,  which  have  been 
examined  with  reference  to  this  question,  nothiii}^  has  been  found  calculated  to 
sustain  the  belief///^//  any  line  of  separation  xeas  e:er  settled  or  even  proposed^  nor 
has  any  trace  of  such  an  ajjjreement  been  iliscovered  in  the  archives  of  the  (kjiart- 
iiieut  of  foreijjn  affairs  of  France,  which  have  been  searched  with  the  view  of 
ascertaining  the  fact. 

When  Monroe  became  President  he  still  maintained  his  theory  as  to  the  forty- 
ninth  parallel,  and  his  Secretary  of  State,  .Mr.  .Vdams,  coinmentin;^  on  our  claim, 
July  22,  1823,  said: 

The  right  of  the  United  Status  from  forty-.secoiul  to  forty-ninth  dej^rees  on  the  Pacific  we  consider 
as  unquest'->nal)Ie. 

Aj^aiii,  ill  June,  1826,  Mr.  Clay,  beinjf  Secretary  of  vState  for  Mr.  Monroe, 
instructed  our  minister  that  he  was  authorized  to  offer  an  extension  of  the  line  of 
49°  to  the  Hacific  as  a  boundary.      He  said: 

Tliis  is  our  ultiniutuin,  and  you  may  so  announce  it.  We  rnii  consent  to  no  line  more  favorable 
to  Great  Britain. 

The  most  pronounced  declaration  hostile  to  these  repeated  views  was  that 
enunciated  by  the  Democratic  National  Convention  in  184.^,  which  nominated  Mr. 
Polk  for  the  Presidency.     It  was  unanimously  resolved  by  that  convention — 

That  our  title  to  the  whole  of  Orejjon  is  clear  and  un(|uestionahIe;  that  no  ixirtion  of  the  s.inie 
oujjlit  to  he  ceded  to  I^nKland  or  any  other  jM)wer. 

And  it  was  urged  against  Mr.  Clay  that  in  1826,  while  Secretary,  in  his  instruc- 
tions to  Mr.  (iallatin,  he  first  declared  that  (ireat  Hritain  had  not,  and  could  not 
make  out  "even  a  colorable  atle  to  any  portion  of  the  northwest  coast,"  yet  in 
the  same  communication  he  had  authorized  Mr.  (iallatin  to  "propo.se  the  annul- 
ment of  the  convention  of  1818  ami  the  extension  of  the  line  on  the  parallel  o( 
49"  from  the  eastern  side  of  the  'Stony  Mouniains'  to  the  Pacific,  together  with 
the  free  navigation  of  the  Columbia." 

Mr.  Polk  was  pledged  to  retain  the  whole  of  the  Oregon  territory,  but  when  he 
became  President  he,  too,  felt  obliged  to  follow  his  predecessors,  though  not  con- 
ceding to  (ireat  Hritain  any  right  whatever.     H»>,  however,  would  not  agree  to 


THK   LoriSIAXA   PURCHASE.  59 

allow  the  fn-e  naviifatioii  of  the  Cohunbia.  Hr  cousidcrid  that  all  ofTcrs  l)y  our 
ncj^otiators  of  tin.-  tbrty-ninth  ])arallel  could  not,  with  any  h(>])t'  of  success,  be 
eiilarj^ed  by  him.  Three  separate  attempts  had  l)een  made  nnder  Presidents 
Monroe  and  Adams,  in  iSiK,  1S24,  and  1826,  and  all  on  the  line  of  the  forty-ninth 
dey;ree,  and  Tyler  repeated  the  offer  in  1S43.  Polk  accepted  this  ])arallel  as  a 
boundary — not  as  a  ri<^ht,  but  as  a  compromise.  In  his  messaj^e  to  Conj^ress  ii. 
1S45  he  sid)mitled  such  views. 

When  the  treaty  of  1S46  was  before  the  Senate  for  ratification  Mr.  Heuton 
expressed  the  view  that  the  forty-ninth  parallel  was  ours  as  a  matter  of  ri^ht,  as  it 
was  also  a  line  of  convenience  between  the  two  nations.  Jle  arjj;ued  that  it  ])arled 
the  two  systems  of  water — those  of  the  Columbia  and  those  of  the  iMaser;  that  it 
also  conformed  to  the  actual  discoveries  and  settlemenls  of  both  ]>arties.  There 
was  not  on  the  face  of  .lie  earth,  he  .said,  .so  ionj^  and  .so  straij^ht  a  line  or  one  .so 
adapted  to  the  rijLjhts  of  the  parties  and  the  fcattires  of  the  country.  He  insisted 
that  the  forty-ninth  parallel  had  been  agreed  upon  by  the  commissioners: 

This  l)i>uiitlary  was  aaiiiiesi'cd  in  for  a  tiiiiiilri.'<l  years.  Hy  proposing;  to  follow  it  to  lliu  smiiniit 
ol  U.c  Rocky  .Mountains,  the  Hriti.sh  (Voverniuuiit  admits  its  validity  'ly  refusing  to  follow  it  out,  thi-y 
l)t;caine  obnoxious  to  the  ohar>^i'  of  inconsistency. 

To  tho.se  who  believed  as  did  Mr.  Henton  on  this  line,  and  who  also  believed 
that  the  Louisiana  I'urcha.se  extended  to  the  Pacific,  this  position  was  consistent; 
but  to  tho.se  who  claimecl  that  our  title  to  the  country  westward  of  the  Rocky 
Mountains  was  derived  throuj,di  discovery,  or  thron},di  the  reliiuiuishment  of  the 
Spanish  claim,  or  both,  the  forty-ninth  parallel  cotild  only  be  accepted  as  Mr.  Polk 
held,  as  a  com|)ronjise,  but  not  as  a  fixed  rij^ht,  and  such  view  is  without  any 
original  authority  to  sustain  it,  so  far  as  it  may  be  derived  throuji^h  the  treaty  of 
Utrecht.  If  our  ri}j[ht  west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains  was  obtained  thnrnj^h  Captain 
(iray's  discovery,  and  throuj^h  the  relin(|uishment  of  the  vSi)anish  claim,  then,  as 
aj^ainst  (ireat  Hritaiu,  our  line  should  have  been  54°  40',  and  all  reference  to 
previous  adju.stments  east  of  the  Rocky  Mountains  on  the  line  of  49"  for  boundary 
between  the  I'<nj;lish  and  French  possessions  could  have  no  application  to  the 
country  west  )f  tho.se  mountains.  I'rauce  had  no  possessions  in  that  portion  of 
the  e  J.neiu.  Ivveii  th(>n;.;h  commissioners  had  .settled  a  boundary,  as  Mr.  Monroe 
believed,  their  action  could  not  have  had  in  contemplation  country  not  in  po.s- 
session  of  I'Vance. 

CONTINl'Hl)   NHCOTIATION. 

The  second  ueootiation  on  the  line  of  the  forty-ninth  parallel,  in  whichMr. 
(iallatin  appeared  for  the  United  States,  projrres.se(l,  and  }.jreat  interest  was  mani- 
fested by  the  people  of  l)oth  nations. 

.\j;aiu  the  parties  failed  to  aj^ree,  and  aj^ain  another  extension  of  time  was 
allowed  for  joint  occupancy,  this  time,  however,  for  an  indefinite  peritul,  either 
party  beiuj^  at  liberty  to  abrogate  the  extension  by  j.nvin).j  one  year's  notice. 
The  United  States  closed  this  second  .ittempt  by  adherinj^   to  the  claim  for  all 


6o  THE   LOUISIANA    I'lRCHASK. 

the  coiintn-  from  the  forty-second  to  the  forty-ninth  dep^rees  of  north  latitude. 
The  del)ate  attendinjj  the  conference  was  marked  by  a  hij^h  order  of  ability,  the 
diplomatic  skill,  clear  logic,  and  industrial  research  shown  by  Mr.  Gallatin  being 
especially  conspicuous.  The  conference  was  followed  by  a  long  interval  of  time, 
during  which  little  was  said  or  done  in  Congress  in  reference  to  the  disputed  terri- 
tor\'.  Among  the  people,  however,  much  advance  was  quietly  being  made. 
Exploring  parties,  trading  companies  and  missionaries  were  each  year  finding 
their  way  by  water  and  by  land  to  the  country.  Associations  were  formed  in 
various  States  to  emigrate  to  what  now  became  more  generally  known  as  the 
"Oregon  country."  These  people  in  turn  opened  u])  communication  with  those 
left  behind,  thereby  adding  nmch  to  the  general  knowledge  of  the  country  and 
creating  renewed  interest  in  that  region;  this  renewal  of  interest  brought  addi- 
tional influence  upon  Congress  from  the  more  western  vStates  in  the  form  of 
petitions  from  legislatures  and  public  assemblages  demanding  action  on  the  part 
of  the  government  and  a  more  aggressive  assertion  of  our  rights  to  the  country 
claimed. 

HALL  J.    KELLEV'.S   I.MMIOR.\TIO.\    SCHRMK.S. 

Perhaps  no  one  at  so  early  a  date  did  so  nmch  to  arouse  public  attention  to 
Oregon  as  did  Hall  J.  Kelley,  a  graduate  of  Harvard  University,  of  pious  yet  sus- 
picious temper,  and  a  lover  of  travel  and  exploration.  He  was  peculiar  in  many 
characteristics,  and  was  thought  by  many  at  the  time  to  be  a  mere  enthusiast  and 
dreamer,  yet  he  was  a  man  of  learning,  undaunted  courage,  and  inflexible  deter- 
mination. His  self-sacrifices  and  adventures  read  at  the  present  time  more  like 
romance,  as  his  observations  and  conclusions  pointing  to  the  future  of  the  country 
seem  like  prophecy.  As  early  as  1815  he  became  active  in  his  attention  to  that 
disputed  domain.  He  was  constantly  acquiring  information  from  the  trapper,  the 
explorer,  and  the  navigator.  He  proclaimed  the  supreme  right  of  our  country  to 
that  land,  and  believed  it  a  duty  to  acquire  it,  not  only  for  its  value  in  a  commercial 
sense  and  for  expansion  of  American  empire,  but  also  for  the  humanitarian  work  of 
Christiani/ing  the  Indian.  He  organized  a  land  expedition  in  1828,  which  failed 
because  of  lack  of  confidence  in  the  success  of  the  undertaking.  This  was  followed 
later  by  an  attempt  to  fit  out  an  expedition  by  sea,  with  a  view  of  locating  a  colony 
on  Pnget  Sound.  This  also  failed.  In  1829  he  incorporated  a  society  for  Oregon 
immigration.  Lands  were  to  be  cultivated,  towns  built,  ports  established,  trade 
opened  by  water  to  the  islands  and  to  the  Orient,  and  schools  and  churches  were 
to  be  encouraged.  He  lectured  and  printed  much  information  on  Oregon,  and  was 
the  author  of  a  variety  of  books  and  pamphlets  on  his  favorite  subject.  A  circular 
was  published  and  distributed  far  and  wide;  it  contained  a  description  of  the 
country  and  of  the  routes  of  travel,  with  a  glowing  outlook  for  the  future.  Con- 
gress was  memorialized  to  aid  his  undertaking,  and  prominent  men  connected  with 
the  Government  were  importuned  to  cooperate  with  him  in  securing  a  grant  of 


THE   I.oriSIANA    PURCHASE.  6l 

25  square  miles  of  laiul  in  the  Columbia  River  Valley  for  colonial  purposes.  In 
1834  he  reached  ()re<;on,  after  lony^  and  most  adventuresome  travel,  and  there,  in 
that  promised  land,  suffered  in  ways  which  clouded  the  happiness  of  his  after  life, 
which  continued  until  the  ripe  aj:[c  of  H5  years.  On  his  return  his  published 
accounts  of  Orejj^on  were  remarkably  accurate;  and  his  su}j;}j^eslions  for  improving 
the  entrance  of  the  Columbia  river,  with  information  as  to  the  shipbuildinjj^  facili- 
ties of  Pufret  Sound,  and  the  timber,  minerals,  climate,  and  soils  of  Oregon,  were 
all  verified  by  closer  observation  in  later  years.  Senators  Linn  and  Henton,  in  their 
lou}^  stru}^<;le  in  the  United  States  Senate  for  our  title  to  Orej^on,  had  freipient 
occasion  to  consult  Hall  J.  Kclley  as  an  authority  on  that  country.  He  induced 
many  persons  to  j^o  there,  who  in  turn  encourai^ed  others,  and  substantial  Ijcnefits 
followed,  due  directly  and  indirectly  to  his  efforts.  He  lived  to  behold  the  j.;;r()wth 
of  a  mij^hty  em])ire,  and  the  formation  of  States  and  Territories,  from  what  was  a 
comparatively  unexplored  and  unknown  rejjjion  when  he  first  jJublLshed  to  the 
world  a  narrative  of  its  then  incredible  resources,  with  a  foresi}.(ht  of  its  majjnifi- 
cent  destiny.  It  may,  indeed,  be  true,  as  was  said  <jf  him,  that  he  was  more 
capable  of  forming";  jjrand  schemes  than  of  carryinj^  them  to  a  successful  i.ssue,  yet 
history  owes  to  his  memory  the  credit  of  acknowledj^inj^  the  invaluable  aid  which 
he  rendered  his  country  by  his  unselfish  devotion  and  lifelonj;  labors. 

THE   WII-KKS   KXPLORIXC;    EXPFUnTION. 

Still  later  came  the  publications  by  the  Cxovernment  of  Cajjtain  Wilkes's 
explorinjj  expedition,  which  reached  Orej^on  in  the  prinjj  of  1841.  To  Wilkes 
was  intrusted  the  connnand  of  a  squadron  compo.sed  of  the  sloops  of  war  I'lniiintcs 
and  /'ciKock,  the  bri^  Porpo/sc,  the  ship  A'<7/e'/,  and  tenders  St  it  (in//  a\u\  F/viiii^ 
/■'is/i.  Eminent  .scicnti.sts  accompanied  the  expedition.  Surveys  were  made  of 
the  Columbia  river,  and  most  valuable  .scientific  and  j>;eneral  information  obtained 
of  the  country  and  of  the  aborij^itud  inhabitants,  as  well  as  of  the  IJritish  fur- 
tradinjj^  companies,  all  of  which,  bein^  published  officially  and  under  the  super- 
vision of  the  government,  attracted  j^reater  attention  to  the  publications.  The 
reports  covered  a  wide  range  of  subjects,  and  being  more  in  detail  than  the  obser- 
vations by  Lewis  and  Clarke,  thirty-five  years  before,  may  be  said  to  be  the  most 
valuable  and  reliable  of  any  official  information  obtained  of  the  Oregon  country. 
Numerous  books  in  various  languages  were  the  result  of  this  expedition,  though 
it  should  also  be  .said  that  other  countries  than  ( )regon  were  included  in  Wilkes's 
expedition,  and  were  described  in  his  very  interesting  reports. 

President  Tyler,  in  his  mes.sage  to  Congress  December  7,  1842,  in  referring  to 
the  Oregon  question,  assured  that  body  he  should  "not  delay  to  urge  on  (Ireat 
Britain  the  importance  of  its  early  settlement."  Hills  were  introduced  extending 
the  laws  of  the  United  States  over  that  country,  conferring  grants  of  lands  upon 
settlers,  and  establishing  a  line  of  forts,  with  other  protective  assurances. 


!  I 


62  THE    LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 

AMKRICAN   vSETTLEMENTS   ENCOURAGED. 

jSIuch  discussion  arose  in  the  consideration  of  these  measures  in  Conjjress. 
Senator  Renton,  as  before  mentioned,  based  our  right  to  Oregon  on  the  Louisiana 
Purchase,  arguing  that  it  could  be  construed  to  establish  the  forty-ninth  parallel 
as  our  northern  boundary  and  hence  to  include  this  territory,  as  he  asserted  this 
boundary  to  have  been  fixed  by  commissaries  appointed  pursuant  to  the  treaty  of 
Utrecht. 

.Senator  Benton,  in  that  memorable  speech,  insisted  that  occupancy  would 
accomplish,  more  than  treaties.     He  said: 

I  now  K"  for  vin(lic<itin>f  our  rights  (>ii  the  Columliia,  atid,  as  the  first  step  toward  it,  passing  this 
bill  atid  inakttix  these  grants  of  laud  which  will  soon  place  thirty  or  forty  thousand  rifles  lieyond  the 
Rocky  Mountains. 

The  Senate  in  1843  passed  the  bill,  introduced  in  that  body,  containing  the 
guaranties  as  to  governmental  protection,  and  land  grants  to  individuals  who 
should  settle  in  that  country,  with  assurances  as  to  immediate  occupation  by  the 
General  Government.  These  inducements  were  sufficient.  Without  waiting  for 
the  enactment  of  this  bill  into  law,  large  bodies  of  people  commenced  their  march 
for  Oregon  and,  uniting  at  a  point  in  Missouri,  in  June,  1843,  previously  agreed 
upon,  they  traveled  together  across  the  continent.  They  comprised  the  first  large 
body  of  American  citizens  to  reach  the  disputed  territory.  To  this  movement, 
more  than  to  any  previous  one,  may  we  credit  the  first  real  promise  for  the  perma- 
nent occupation  of  the  country  under  the  American  flag,  with  the  pledge  of  the 
nation  to  defend  it  at  all  hazards.  The  spirit  of  these  daring  men  and  pioneers, 
and  their  heroic  courage  in  asserting  our  rights  in  the  far-distant  Oregon,  produced 
for  them  a  universal  feeling  of  admiration  throughout  the  country,  and  with  it  an 
expression  of  opinion  that  the  moment  had  arrived  when  war  should  take  the  place 
of  debate,  and  that  further  to  delay  the  assertion  of  our  rights  would  be  national 
dishonor. 

"  FIFTY- FOUR,    FORTY,    OR    FIGHT." 

As  President  Jefferson,  in  1803,  was  pres.sed  on  by  the  appeals  from  the 
planters  on  the  banks  of  the  Mississippi,  and  the  eanicst  demands  of  his  impatient 
countrymen  everywhere,  so  was  President  Tyler,  in  1843,  "loved  to  serve  a  final 
notice  upon  England  that  further  negotiation  must  cease,  and  he  earnestly  recom- 
mended to  Congress  the  immediate  establishment  of  fortified  places  along  the 
route  to  Oregon.  In  his  annual  message  of  December  5,  1843,  he  proclaimed  it 
as  the  voice  of  the  nation  to  defend  all  of  the  country  north  of  latitude  42°  and 
south  of  54°  40'  on  the  northwest  coast.  President  Tyler  evidently  did  not  believe 
that  the  forty-ninth  parallel  had  ever  been  established  by  any  commission,  or  if  so, 
he  did  not  believe  it  should  apply  to  the  boundar>'  west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains. 

This  was  at  last  a  language  which  could  not  be  mistaken,  and  it  accelerated  the 
final  terms  of  the  conference  which  had  for  the  third  and  last  time  convened  in 


ress. 

iana 

allcl 

this 

ty  of 

ould 


K  this 
1(1  the 


r  the 
who 
y  the 
[g  for 
larch 
greed 
large 
iiieiit, 
ernui- 
)f  the 
iieers, 
Auced 
1  it  an 
placo 
tional 


m  the 
latient 
a  final 
reconi- 
ig  the 
med  it 
2°  and 
aelieve 
r  if  so, 
n  tains, 
ted  the 
:ned  in 


James  K.  Polk. 


THK   LOUISIANA    PURCHASK.  63 

nej^otiation  of  the  '^)re}jf()n  cuicstion.  When  President  Polk  soon  afterward  suc- 
ceeded President  Tyler,  he,  while  reiteratinj^j  his  former  position  as  to  onr  ri}j[ht, 
indicated  his  intention  to  stand  l)v  the  modified  offer  of  the  forty-ninth  parallel 
purely  as  a  comi)romise,  and  also  amionnced  the  opinion  that  our  nation  should 
terminate  the  joint  occni)ancy  and  y;ive  Enj^land  the  necessary  one  year's  notice. 
Demonstrations  in  approval  of  this  determination  to  end  the  uncertainty  were  every- 
where heard.  War  now  seemed  inevitable  and  preparations  followed.  This  evi- 
dence of  i)opular  feeling,  foUowinjj^  the  very  decided  tone  of  Tyler  and  Polk,  was 
the  best  reminder  to  the  British  that  no  more  concessions  would  be  made  by  our 
jjoveniment.  Finally  the  settlement  came  in  the  offer  of  Hritain  to  accept  the 
forty-ninth  parallel  and  the  Straits  of  I'^ica  for  the  northern  boundary  of  our 
nation,  and  this  beinj^  accepted  the  treaty  was  ratified  June  15,  iH^O.  Thus  ended 
one  of  the  most  memorable  and  long-continued  negotiations,  and  one  in  which 
some  of  the  most  eminent  statesmen  of  both  countries  participated.  Our  own 
nation  selected  such  men  as  (iallatin,  Wel)stcr,  Calhoun  and  Buchanan.  The 
arguments  submitted  by  our  negotiators  evinced  the  greatest  learning,  ingenuity 
and  patient  research. 

OREGON    ADMITTED    AS   A   TERRITORY. 

President  Polk,  who  was  at  all  times  the  earnest  friend  of  Oregon,  and  who 
was  elected,  as  before  stated,  on  a  platform  which  firmly  asserted  the  right  of  our 
nation  to  that  entire  region,  was  now  extremely  an.xious  that  a  territorial  form  of 
government  should  be  extended  over  it  during  his  admini.stration. 

In  his  annual  message  to  Congress  in  1846,  and  in  1847,  ^'^  strongly  recom- 
mended this  action.  On  May  29,  1S48,  he  submitted  to  both  Houses  of  Congress 
a  .special  message  again  urging  attention  and  reminding  the  nation's  lawmakers 
of  the  memorials  of  .settlers  in  the  Columbia  river  valley,  of  their  exposed  con- 
dition, and  of  the  pressing  necessity  which  required  that  mounted  men  should 
immediately  be  called  into  service. 

Even  in  his  first  message  to  Congress  he  expressed  his  solicitude  for  these 
expo.sed  pioneers.      He  said: 

It  is  tiiuch  to  be  roKretted  that  while  under  this  act  British  sul)jects  have  enjoyed  the  protection 
of  Hritish  hiws  and  Hritish  judicial  trihunals  tlirouj^luuit  the  whole  of  Orc^jon,  .Xinerican  citizens  in 
the  same  territory  have  enjoyed  no  such  protection  from  their  j^overnment.  .Vt  the  same  time  the 
result  illustrates  the  character  of  our  jieople  and  their  institutions.  In  spite  of  this  neglect  they  have 
multiplied,  and  their  number  is  raj)idly  increasing  in  that  territory.  They  have  made  no  apjjeal  to 
arms,  but  have  ])eaeefully  fortified  themselves  in  their  new  homes  by  the  adoption  of  rejiublican  insti- 
tutions for  themselves,  furnishing  another  example  of  the  truth  that  self-government  is  inherent  in 
the  American  breast  .■md  must  jirevail. 

Bills  were  introduced  in  Congress  providing  a  territorial  form  of  government, 
and  affording  such  other  relief  as  had  been  recommended.  Much  delay  ensued 
over  the  tpiestion,  so  common  at  that  time  in  the  admission  of  States  and  Terri- 
tfsries,  as  to  whether  slavery  should  or  should  not  be  prohibited. 


64  THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 

The  objectionable  clause  in  the  Orejjon  bill  to  many  was  that  which  recognized 
and  extended  to  the  new  territory  the  i)rincij)le  of  the  ordinance  of  1787  excluding 
slavery,  which  ordinance  was  also  in  harmony  with  the  legislation  of  the  provi- 
sional govenuuent  of  Oregon  interdicting  slavery.  Tiiis  clause  in  the  bill  was  as 
follows: 

That  the  inliahitiuits  of  said  Territory  shall  he  entitled  to  enjoy  all  and  singular  the  rights,  privi- 
lejyjes,  and  advantages  j^'ranterl  and  secnred  to  the  i)eo]ile  of  the  territory  of  the  United  States  north- 
west of  the  river  Ohio  hy  the  articles  of  compact  contained  in  the  ordiiiance  for  the  j^'overnnieiit  of 
said  Territory,  on  the  13th  <lay  of  Jnly,  17S7,  and  shall  he  subject  to  all  the  conditions  and  restrictions 
and  prohibitions  in  said  articles  of  compact  im])oseil  njjon  the  ])eo]ile  of  said  territory. 

The  objection  urged  against  this  principle  was  crystallized  in  the  strong  words 
of  John  C.  Calhoun,  in  his  speech  on  the  bill,  in  which  he  said: 

There  are  three  (|uestions  involve<l:  l-'irst,  the  ])ower  of  Conjjress  to  interfere  with  ])ersoiis  emi- 
gratinj;  with  their  (slave  1  j)roperty  int<^  the  State;  second,  the  power  of  the  territorial  government  to 
do  it;  and  third,  the  power  of  Conjjress  to  vest  snch  a  powir  in  the  Territory. 

This  was  the  issue,  and  around  it  waged  the  struggle.  Should  it  be  free,  or 
should  it  be  slave  territory? 

The  most  eminent  statesmen  of  our  nation  participated  in  the  debates  in  this 
memorable  contest.  Web.ster,  Ca.ss,  Calhoun,  Douglas,  Benton,  Crittenden,  Hale, 
Houston,  McClernand,  Collamer,  Corwin  of  Ohio,  Hutler  of  South  Carolina,  Hell 
of  Tennessee,  Davis  of  Mississippi,  and  Mason  of  Virginia — all  Senators — assumed 
a  leading  part.  Hannibal  Hamlin,  afterwards  Vice-President,  was  a  Senator  at  that 
time. 

In  the  House  of  Representatives,  among  those  then  and  since  eminent  before 
the  country  and  voting  on  the  passage  of  the  bill,  were  John  Quincy  Adams  of 
Mas.sachn.sett.s,  Abraham  Lincoln  and  John  Wentworth  of  Illinois,  Andrew  John- 
son of  Tennessee,  Joshua  R.  Ciiddings  of  Ohio,  David  Wilmot  of  Pennsylvania, 
Robert  Toombs  and  Alexander  H.  Stephens  of  Georgia.  ( )f  these  distinguished 
men  one  had  been  previously  and  two  were  afterwards  Presidents  of  the  United 
States.  It  may  also  be  mentioned,  as  of  some  interest,  that  President  Taxlor 
offered  to  Abraham  Lincoln  the  governorship  of  the  Territory  to  succeed  Governor 
Lane,  and  that  the  honor  was  declined. 

The  fight  was  a  hard  and  a  long  one,  but  the  end  came  gloriously,  and  Oregon 
with  its  vast  domain  was  constituted  a  Territory  of  the  United  States  on  the  14th 
day  of  Augu.st,  1848,  with  all  the  privileges  and  benefits  which  follow  such  con- 
ditions in  the  political  relations  of  newly  admitted  territories.  The  vote  of  admis- 
sion was  ahso  conclusive  upon  the  question  of  slavery,  and  free  soil  was  proclaimed 
as  a  heritage  for  the  new  empire  west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains. 

Of  all  the  eminent  statesmen  who  were  true  and  tried  in  the  long  contest  for 
supremacy  of  American  rights  upon  the  far-distant  Oregon,  none  should  be  longer 
or  more  gratefully  remembered  by  the  people  of  the  Pacific  northwest  than 
Thomas  H.  Benton. 


■i- 
as 


ri- 
h- 
of 
ns 


3r 

is 

e, 
11 
;d 
at 

re 
af 

II- 

a, 
>d 
;d 
3r 
3r 

)n 
:h 

II- 
s- 
;d 

ar 
er 
in 


Thomas  H.  Benton. 


TIIK    LOUISIANA    I'lkCIIA.SU. 


65 


THOMAS    II.    MK\T()\. 

He  was  for  thirty  years  in  tla-  I'liitcd  States  Seiiatf  from  the  State  of  Mis- 
souri, and  was  one  of  the  stronj^^  and  early  advocates  of  the  ( )re)^oii  conntrv'. 
His  inlha-nce  all  the  way  tliron<;li,  and  in  tin-  last  tryinj^  onkal  preeedinj^  the 
admission  of  Orej^on  into  the  Union  as  a  Territory,  was  most  elTeetive.  He  was 
the  earliest  friend  of  a  railroad  to  the  Pacific,  and  was  larjjely  instrumental  in 
secnrinji^  j^overn mental  surveys  with  a  view  to  ascertaining;  the  feasil)ility  of  rail- 
way construction  to  that  remote  land.  He  was  always  i)r()minent  in  f.\i)lora- 
tions  in  the  far  West,  and  in  enconraj^inj;  overland  transit  to  the  Pacific.  His 
l)rediction  as  to  the  traffic  which  would  meet  at  the  mouth  of  the  Columbia  river — 
coming;  and  jj:oinjf  between  the  Occident  and  the  Orient — has  been  verified  in  a 
sur])risin<;  dej^ree.  As  far  back  as  1820  he  was  the  author  of  many  valuable 
contributions  to  the  jjublic  jjress  on  the  resources  of  the  j.(reat  West.  He  was 
at  all  times  an  ardent  anne.\ationi.st,  havinff  taken  an  active  part  in  reference  to 
the  annexation  of  Te.xas.  His  influence  with  President  Polk  had  much  to  do 
in  decidiu].;  that  distinjj^nished  President's  attitude  in  reference  t(.  the  acceptance 
of  the  boundary  line  west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains  on  the  parallel  of  the  forty- 
ninth  de}.free.  His  particijjation  in  all  the  discu.ssions  attendinjr  the  acijnisition 
of  the  Mexican  territory  was  active,  and  his  aid  invaluable.  In  the  history  of 
western  development  his  name  will  live  lonji^  as  one  of  its  most  able  and  successful 
advocates. 

OKKC.ON    I'KOVISION.M,   C.OVKR.X.MKXT. 

The  fiioncrrs  of  the  West. — Oen.  J()se])h  Lane,  of  Mexican  war  fame,  was 
appointed  by  President  Polk  jfovernor  of  the  new  Territory,  and  on  the  3d  day  of 
March,  1849,  he  reached  Orejron  City,  and  there,  unfurlinjr  the  Stars  and  Stri])esover 
that  westerly  confine  of  our  Repul)lic,  he  a.s.sumed  the  duties  of  his  office  and  pro- 
claimed the  laws  of  the  United  States  to  be  in  force.  ( rovernor  Georffe  Abernethy, 
who  had  .so  wisely  and  so  conscientiously  served  as  provisional  <;overnor  for  the  four 
precediu};  years,  cheerfully  relinqui.shed  his  authority  to  the  chosen  representative  of 
ourjjjreat  nation.  Durinjj  those  four  years  of  an.xiety  a  thorouj^hly  orjjanized  jfov- 
ernment  had  been  .successfully  maintained,  laws  were  enacted  by  an  orderly  elected 
leji^islative  assembly  and  construed  by  a  judicial  tribunal  carefully  selected  and 
composed  of  men  of  recognized  ability  and  inte<;rity.  Ta.xes  were  impo.sed  and 
revenues  collected  without  difficulty,  while  the  strenj^th  of  the  pioneer  jj^overnment 
was  severely  tested  by  wars  with  the  hostile  Indians,  when  troops  were  raised, 
officers  commissioned,  discipline  maintained,  battles  fouji^ht  and  victories  won. 
Here  was  an  independent  State  and  a  voluntary  j>[overnment  3,000  miles  remote 
from  the  capital  of  our  nation,  which  had  long  been  petitioned  and  implored  for 
its  protecting  aegis.  Our  history  has  afforded  no  loftier  illustration  of  the  capacity 
of  the  American  citizen  for  .self-government,  because  no  other  people  on  this  con- 
tinent, for  so  long  a  period,  suffered  the  same  isolation,  endured  the  same  privations, 

2239 5 


^^ 


4^  ^^^ 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


4is 


1.0 


I.I 


1^128 

■  50     l"^^ 


us 

U 


li:0 


1.25 


1.4 


m 

1.6 


m 


/^% 


^J^ 


.^^ 


^^y 
^ 


y 


/A 


3^ 


66 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


or  SO  patiently  and  nncomplainingly  faced  the  same  responsibilities  and  so  honor- 
ably and  successfully  fulfilled  them,  as  these  builders  of  American  empire  west  of 
the  Rocky  Mountains.  Their  provisional  government  is  as  splendid  a  monument 
to  their  administrative  ability  as  the  example  of  their  heroic  struggles  and  patriotic 
devotion  is  an  inspiration  and  a  blessing  to  all  who  shall  come  after  them.  The 
annals  of  pioneer  civilization  may  be  searched  in  vain  for  names  more  honored  or 
more  worthy  of  remembrance  by  a  grateful  people  than  those  of  McLoughlin, 
Whitman,  Abernethy,  Lane,  Thurston,  Nesmith,  Williams,  Applegate  and  Deady. 
Some  of  them  have  ornamented  the  highest  legislative  councils  of  our  nation, 
and  some  of  them  the  judiciary ;  some  achieved  fame  on  the  battlefield  or  as  self- 
denying  missionaries,  while  still  others  filled  the  measure  of  their  ambition  in  the 
provisional  and  territorial  governments.  Many,  too,  there  were  who  liberally 
extended  the  hand  of  charity  to  the  needy,  and  in  the  hour  of  danger  heroically 
marched  to  the  rescue  of  the  belated,  the  wayworn,  and  the  often  imperiled  emi- 
grant; but  of  them  all  the  generous  and  knightly  deeds  of  old  John  McLoughlin 
are  of  lasting  and  most  precious  memory. 

THE  EXTENT  OF  THE  OREGON  COUNTRY. 


The  Oregon  country  now  embraces  the  States  of  Oregon,  Idaho,  Washington 
and  parts  of  Montana  and  Wyoming. 

Its  area  is  more  than  two  and  one-third  times  that  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland ; 
more  than  two  and  one-half  times  that  of  Italy;  more  than  one-third  larger  than 
either  France,  the  German  or  the  Austrian  Empire;  one-quarter  larger  than  Spain 
and  Portugal;  larger  than  the  German  Empire,  Switzerland,  Denmark,  Belgium 
and  the  Netherlands  combined;  larger  than  Japan,  the  Philippines  and  the 
Hawaiian  Islands;  four  times  larger  than  the  New  England  States;  more  than 
two  and  one-half  times  larger  than  New  York,  New  Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  Dela- 
ware and  Maryland  combined;  more  than  two  and  one-fifth  times  larger  than 
Ohio,  Indiana  and  Illinois;  larger  than  the  total  area  of  Virginia,  North  and 
South  Carolina,  Kentucky  and  Tennessee;  and  larger  than  the  States  of  Texas, 
or  California  and  Nevada. 

The  population  is  now  in  excess  of  1,000,000. 

The  value  of  real  and  personal  property  in  1890  amounted  to  $423,887,065. 
Since  then  it  has  increased  a  large  per  cent,  while  the  agricultural,  mining  and 
lumber  interests  have  grown  to  vast  proportions. 

The  public  lands  disposed  of  prior  to  1897  equal  an  area  of  80,118  square 
miles. 

Three  great  transcontinental  railways  now  cross  the  lofty  Rocky  Mountain 
range  and  unite  the  upper  Mississippi  and  the  Great  Lakes  with  the  waters  of  the 
Columbia,  while  still  another  railway  commencing  at  New  Orleans,  once  the  capital 
of  the  original  Louisiana  province,  and  reaching  over  the  State  of  Louisiana  around 
from  the  south  through  Texas,  New  Mexico,  Arizona  and  California,  crosses  the 
forty-second  parallel  of  north  latitude,  passing  through  Oregon,  until  it  finds 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


67 


in 
he 
tal 
id 
he 
ds 


a  terminus  at  the  city  of  Portland  on  the  tide  waters  of  the  Pacific  Ocean. 
Flourishing  cities,  towns,  and  villages,  well-cultivated  farms,  vineyards  and 
orchards,  and  manufacturing,  mining  and  commercial  enterprises  are  found  at 
frequent  intervals,  often  in  continuous  lines,  along  those  vast  distances  of  travel ; 
and  yet  ihere  are  those  still  living  who  have  seen  that  great  expanse  of  country 
when  it  was  comparatively  unknown,  the  greater  portion  of  which  having  been 
noted  on  the  maps  of  our  schoolboy  days  as  "Desert"  or  "Unexplored."  By 
many  it  was  regarded  as  a  worthless  waste.  So  late  as  January,  1843,  when  our 
nation's  claim  to  the  Oregon  country  was  still  being  considered,  Mr.  McDufiie,  a 
distinguished  Senator,  in  a  speech  delivered  in  the  United  States  Senate,  said : 

What  is  the  nature  of  this  country  ?  Why,  as  I  understand  it,  700  miles  this  side  of  the  Rocky 
Mountains  is  uninhabitable;  a  region  where  rain  seldom  ever  falls;  a  barren,  sandj-  soil;  mountains 
totally  impassable.  Well,  now,  what  are  we  going  to  do  in  this  case?  How  are  you  going  to  apply 
steam?  Have  you  made  anything  like  an  estimate  of  the  cost  of  a  railroad  from  here  to  the  Columbia? 
Why,  the  wealth  of  the  Indies  would  be  insufficient.  Of  what  use  will  this  be  for  agricultural  pur- 
poses? Why,  I  would  not  for  that  purpose  give  a  pinch  of  snuff  for  the  whole  territory.  I  thank  God 
for  His  mercy  in  placing  the  Rocky  Mountains  there. 

A   vSPLENDID   EMPIRE. 

Had  such  pessimistic  statesmen  prevailed  we  can  now  realize  what  would 
have  been  lost  to  our  country  in  a  failure  to  assert  our  rightful  claim  to  this  domain. 
I  have  adverted  to  the  marvelous  productions  in  agriculture,  and  other  resources 
of  the  entire  region  west  of  the  Rockies.  It  may  be  of  interest  to  single  out 
the  individual  States,  which  now  form  the  group  once  embracing  the  Oregon 
country,  and  credit  each  with  a  few  of  the  items  which  enter  into  its  industrial 
development.  The  Statistical  Abstract  of  the  United  States  for  1897  enables  us 
to  verify  some  most  interesting  facts: 

Oregon^  the  mother  of  the  group,  makes  a  magnificent  industrial  showing, 
and  a  few  productions  must  illustrate  for  all.  Her  gold  yield  in  1897  is  valued  at 
$1,354,500,  as  estimated  by  the  Director  of  the  Mint,  but  as  unofficially  reported 
here  is  $3,000,000.  The  foreign  and  domestic  exports  in  1897,  as  shown  by  the 
customs  reports,  equaled  about  $7,016,368,  while  the  free  and  dutiable  imports 
amounted  to  $1,640,099.  Her  wool  clip  for  the  same  year  equaled  18,440,850 
pounds;  the  sheep  numbered  2,682,779,  and  were  valued  at  $4,451,150,  ranking 
her  as  third  in  number  of  sheep  among  the  wool-grcwing  Sta;^es  and  Territories. 
The  oxen  and  other  cattle  were  valued  at  $11,957,1,88,  horses  at  $3,989,854,  and 
milch  cows  at  $2,689,449.  The  salmon  fisheries  and  canneries  reported  a  gross 
output  for  the  same  year  valued  at  $1,231,591.  The  wheat  yield  in  1897  equaled 
18,155,000  bushels,  valued  at  $13,071,000,  while  the  hay  product  was  valued  at 
$8,431,550.  The  Oregon  timber,  like  that  of  Washington  and  California,  is 
noted  for  its  mammoth  size  and  superior  quality  as  well  as  for  its  quantity.  In 
foui  counties  alone,  along  the  coast,  the  standing  timber  is  estimated  to  contain 
56,000,000,000  feet,  B.  M.  The  bank  clearings  for  Portland  will  best  illustrate 
the  commercial  importance  and  marvelous  growth  of  that  metropolis  of  less  than 
100,000  inhabitants,  and  also  indicate  the  progressive  spirit  which  animates  the 


68 


THE   LOUISIANA  PURCHASE. 


business  communities  tributary  to  this  great  shipping  mart  of  the  Pacific  North- 
west. In  1897  these  clearings  amounted  to  $74,440,000,  while  the  wholesale  trade 
for  the  same  year  is  shown  to  have  equaled  in  value  $75,000,000.  (See  holiday 
edition  Orcgonian,  January,  1898.)  The  lumber,  coal,  fruit,  hop  and  numerous 
other  products  could  be  added  to  swell  the  grand  total,  and,  when  to  this  we 
further  add  the  value  of  improved  farm  land,  the  value  of  the  mines,  forests  and 
manufacturing  plants,  and  the  wealth  of  the  towns  and  cities,  we  should  call 
forth  the  departed  shades  of  the  old  Senators  to  apologize  for  their  sneering 
estimates  of  this  wonderland  for  which  they  would  not  give  a  "pinch  of  snuff " 

in  1843. 

Washington,  the  second  State  of  the  group,  is  not  far  behind  the  first.  The 
domestic  and  foreign  exports  of  Pnget  Sound,  in  Washington,  which  in  1883 
amounted  to  $1,770,219,  had  increased  in  1897  to  $11,864,925,  while  the  total  free 
and  dutiable  imports  for  that  year  equaled  $7,066,131.  These  exports  exceed 
those  from  many  of  the  great  ports  on  the  Atlantic,  such  as  Charleston,  Wilming- 
ton, IMobile  and  Pensacola.  The  bank  clearings  of  the  two  leading  cities  will 
perhaps  afford  an  excellent  index  of  the  industrial  activity.  In  1897  the  clearings 
for  Seattle  represent  $36,050,000,  while  those  for  Tacoma  represent  $28,910,000. 
The  timber  cut  in  the  State  of  Washington,  in  189^.  for  manufacturing  pur- 
poses amounted  to  1,440,135,000  feet,  of  which  275,000,000  was  in  laths  and 
shingles.  There  was  sold  in  that  single  year  to  Australia,  Hawaii  and  South 
America  100,000,000  feet  of  lumber.  That  a  proper  conception  may  be  formed  of 
the  productive  forest  area  of  Washington,  it  may  be  stated,  on  the  authority  of  the 
Department  of  Agriculture,  that  the  standing  timber  (mainly  Douglas  spruce) 
equals  410,000,000,000  feet  and  covers  23,500,000  acres.  Dwelling  still  further 
upon  this  State,  it  may  be  said  to  rank  eleventh  among  the  wheat-growing  States 
of  the  Union,  having  produced  in  1897,  20,124,648  bushels,  valued  at  $13,684,761. 
In  the  same  year  Washington  had  oxen  and  beef  cattle  valued  at  $5,436,952, 
milch  cows  valued  at  $3,109,677,  horses  valued  at  $4,163,817,  and  sheep  valued 
at  $1,622,446.  The  gold  output  in  1897  amounted  to  $449,600,  and  the  silver 
production  to  $313,900. 

Idaho — the  Gem  of  the  Mountains — the  latest  of  the  northwest  group,  and 
which  was  admitted  into  the  Union  as  a  State  so  late  as  July  3,  1890,  only  eight 
years  ago,  also  presents  a  most  creditable  showing.  Her  gold  yield  in  1897  was 
valued  at  $2,125,300,  and  her  silver  at  $7,103,300,  while  her  lead  output  was 
large,  valued  at  $3,500,000,  as  per  estimate  of  the  Director  of  the  Mint.  The 
value  of  her  oxen  and  other  cattle  in  1897  was  $6,500,000,  and  the  sheep 
$3,612,313.     Her  wheat  yield  in  1897  amounted  to  2,707,672  bushels. 


OUR  MEXICAN   PURCHASE. 


A  still  further  illustration  of  timely  and  profitable  acquisition  of  territory  is 
that  represented  through  the  treaty  of  Guadaloupe  Hidalgo  with  Mexico,  Feb- 
ruar}'  2,  1848,  following,  and  growing  out  of  the  Mexican  war. 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


69 


This  brouj^lit  to  us  522,568  square  miles,  or  334,443,520  acres,  to  which 
should  be  added  the  Gadsdeu  Purchase  five  years  later,  coveriug  45,535  square 
miles,  and  embracing  an  area  of  29,142,400  acres.  From  these  we  have  since 
formed  five  great  political  divisions,  viz,  the  States  of  California,  Nevada,  Utah, 
the  Territories  of  New  Mexico  and  Arizona  in  part,  and  a  small  portion  of  what 
is  now  Colorado  and  Wyoming.  Merely  to  mention  Californi.\  is  to  emphasize 
the  enormous  value  of  the  acquisition.  She  has  contributed  to  the  nation,  and 
to  the  world's  supply  of  gold,  since  1848,  an  excess  of  $1,309,490,917,  as  shown 
by  the  United  States  Mint  returns  for  successive  years.  In  a  single  year  (1853) 
her  gold  output  was  valued  at  $65,000,000.  Her  precious  mineral  product  was 
the  marvel  of  the  world,  and  exercised  a  material  influence  in  the  relation  of  the 
money  metals  among  the  rations.  With  such  an  exhaustive  and  continuous 
outpour  of  her  golden  metal  during  fifty  years  of  her  status  as  an  American 
comriiunity,  she  still  maintains  a  bounteous  offering,  and  though  no  longer  the 
largest  producer,  her  yield  last  year  amounted  to  $15,871,000.  The  gold  product 
of  the  United  States,  in  1897,  reached  a  total  of  $59,210,795,  more  than  one- 
fourth  the  entire  gold  production  of  the  world,  and  placed  our  nation  ahead  of 
any  other  country  in  yield.  We  owe  this  proud  eminence  to  our  foresight  and 
wise  policy  of  annexation ;  without  it  our  land  of  gold  would  have  continued  to 
icmain  the  possessions  of  foreign  powers.  California  has  discovered  also  that 
her  wealth  is  not  alone  in  her  minerals,  but  that  agriculture,  horticulture,  and 
animal  industry  are  within  her  capabilities,  and  her  splendid  showing  attests  this. 
Her  20,000,000  bushels  of  barley,  worth  $11,000,000,  ranks  her  as  first  in  barley 
production.  This  State  is  also  first  in  citrous  products.  Her  wheat  product,  in 
1897,  was  39,394,020  bushels,  valued  at  $26,887,000,  ranking  her  fifth  in  order 
among  the  wheat-growing  States.  Her  hay  product  is  valued  at  $24,444,000,  and 
fourth  in  order.  Her  wheat  value  is  now  almost  twice  that  of  her  gold  yield. 
Her  sheep  are  valued  at  $5,785,915  ;  cattle,  including  milch  cows,  at  $25,137,835, 
and  her  horses  and  mules  at  $14,246,765.  Her  wine  product  is  30,000,000  gal- 
lons, beet  sugar  65,000,000  pounds,  raisins  64,000,000  pounds,  prunes  82,000,000 
pounds,  and  oranges  10,250  carloads.  The  redwood  along  the  coast  range  alone 
is  estimated  to  contain  25,000,000,000  feet,  B.  M.,  and  the  mills  manufacture 
enormous  quantities  of  lumber  and  employ  large  numbers  of  her  people. 

The  remainder  of  our  Mexica!T  purchase  also  makes  an  excellent  exhibit: 

Utah  mined  $1,805,988  of  gold  and  $11,413,463  in  silver  last  year.  Her 
cattle  and  milch  cows  were  valued  at  $7,056,000,  while  her  sheep  were  valued 
at  $4,144,863.  The  copper  output  in  1896  amounted  to  $376,500,  and  the  lead 
output  to  about  $2,000,000.     Her  wheat  yield  in  1897  was  3,190,740  bushels. 

Nevada  had  a  gold  yield  in  1897  of  $2,468,000,  and  a  silver  yield  of  $905,310. 
Her  sheep  were  valued  at  $1,206,467,  and  the  cattle  and  horses  at  $5,264,000. 

Neiv  Mexico' s  gold  and  silver  yield  did  not  exceed  $681,239,  but  she  makes 
her  record  at  present  in  cattle,  valued  at  $12,329,397,  and  her  sheep,  valued  at 
$5,364,284.     The  wheat  yield  in  1897  '"^Jnounted  to  4,282,848  bushels. 


70 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


Arizona  possesses  a  value  in  cattle  of  $7,807,000,  and  in  sheep  of  $1,773,734 ; 
her  gold  yield  amounted  to  5^2,700,000,  and  her  silver  product  to  nearly  as  much. 
The  output  of  copper  for  Arizona  in  1896  amounted  to  $7,840,505. 

For  all  this  splendid  empire  from  Mexico,  embracing  three  whole  States,  por- 
tions of  two  others,  and  almost  two  entire  Territories,  the  purchase  price  was 
$15,000,000! 

TOTAL  SILVER  OUTPUT. 

Here  it  may  be  proper  to  add  that  the  total  silver  production  of  the  United 
States  in  1896  was  valued  at  $76,069,000,  and  of  this  95  per  cent  was  mined  in  six 
divisions:  Colorado,  Montana,  Utah,  Idaho,  Nevada  and  Arizona.  This  only 
emphasizes  in  another  way  the  forcible  manner  in  which  we  are  reminded  of  the 
benefits  which  have  accrued  to  our  nation  through  the  policy  of  annexation  and 
territorial  expansion.  Americans  now  own  this  wealth,  and  an  American — not  a 
foreign — flag  floats  over  this  entire  domain  of  precious  metal  output. 

TOTAL  COST  OF  ANNEXATIONS. 


The  grand  total  of  the  sums  paid  for  our  foreign  acquisitions  amounts  to 
$52,200,000,  a  sum  less  than  the  value  of  one  year's  output  of  Montana's  minerals, 
of  Minnesota's  annual  wheat  yield,  or  of  the  cattle  and  hay  product  of  California 
for  one  year. 

IMPERFECT  STATISTICS. 

In  justice  to  the  different  States  and  Territories  whose  leading  resources  have 
been  briefly  mentioned,  it  should  be  said  that  the  statistics  quoted  are  in  every 
instance  believed  to  represent  less  than  the  actual  quantities  and  values.  The 
government's  statistician  makes  record  only  of  such  data  as  he  receives  from 
reliable  sources,  while  the  fact  still  remains  that  much  valuable  and  reliable  data 
never  reach  him.  This  is  largely  due  to  our  defective  system  of  procuring  authen- 
tic information  in  reference  to  our  nation's  annual  productive  capacity.  Unofficial 
and  yet  most  reliable  information  is  before  this  ofiice  showing  very  material 
increases  over  the  reported  yields  of  some  of  the  States  as  collected  by  the  statis- 
tical bureau. 

OREGON  AND  THE  LOUISIANA  PURCHASE. 

Having  digressed  thus  far  to  show  the  profitableness  of  our  Oregon  and 
Mexican  acquisitions,  I  return  to  conclude  the  consideration  of  the  American 
claim  to  the  Oregon  country  so  far  as  to  prove  that  our  title  could  not  be  deduced 
through  the  Louisiana  Purchase. 

Mr.  Calhoun,  Secretary  of  State,  in  presenting  the  claims  of  the  United  States 
to  the  Oregon  country,  relied,  he  said,  upon  "our  own  proper  claims  and  those  we 
have  derived  from  France  and  Spain.     We  ground  the  former  as  against  Great 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


71 


Britain  on  priority  of  discovery  and  priority  of  exploration  and  settlement." 
Referring  to  our  claims  derived  from  France  under  the  Louisiana  Purchase,  he 
said: 

It  also  added  much  to  the  stre'.igth  of  our  title  to  the  region  beyond  the  Rocky  Mountains  by 
restoring  to  us  the  important  link  of  contiguity  westward  to  the  Pacific,  which  had  been  surrendered 
by  the  treaty  of  1763.  *  *  *  It  is  therefore  not  at  all  surprising  that  France  should  claim  the 
country  west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains  (as  may  be  inferred  from  her  maps)  on  the  same  principle  that 
Great  Britain  had  claimed  and  dispossessed  her  of  the  regions  west  of  the  Alleghany.  *  *  *  gut 
since  then  we  have  strengfthened  our  itle  by  adding  to  our  proper  claims  and  those  of  France  the 
claims  also  of  Spain  by  the  treaty  of  Florida.  The  claims  which  we  have  acquired  from  her  between 
the  Rocky  Mountains  and  the  Pacific  rest  on  her  priority  of  discovery. 

These  extracts  from  Mr.  Calhoun's  argument  exhibit  in  brief  his  reasoning 
for  connecting  the  Louisiana  cession  with  the  country  west  of  the  Rocky  Moun- 
tains. It  will  be  observed  that  it  is  largely  confined  to  the  claim  of  contiguity. 
He  does  not  pretend  that  the  country  was  originally  included  in  the  cession, 
except  as  he  refers  to  France  having  claimed  that  coimtry;  and  it  will  be  noticed 
that  he  only  infers  this  from  French  maps.  The  answer  to  this  inference  is  that 
but  very  few  French  maps,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  ever  showed  that  country  as 
belonging  to  France,  through  Louisiana.  The  first  French  maps  after  La  Salle's 
discovery  and  after  the  naming  of  Lo-  isiana  by  him,  excluded  the  country  beyond 
the  mountains  from  Louisiana. 

The  fact  that  Mr.  Calhoun  was  compelled  to  resort  to  inference  to  establish 
a  claim  is  rather  presixmptive  of  his  own  doubt,  and  when  we  notice  his  further 
admission  that  we  "strengthened  our  title"  by  adding  the  claims  of  Spain  west  of 
the  Rockies,  his  doubt  is  doubl)'  shcm.  He  further  sanctions  the  claims  of  Spain 
when  he  refers  to  the  priority  of  Spanish  discoveries  in  the  Pacific,  as  he  quotes 
from  history,  and  cites  the  voyages  of  the  Spanish  navigator,  Maldonado,  in  1528, 
ending  with  those  under  Galiano  and  Voldes  in  1792,  all  being  under  the  authority 
of  Spain  and  all  fruitful  in  discovery  upon  the  Pacific  coast.     He  says — 

That  they  discovered  and  explored  not  only  the  entire  coast  of  what  is  now  the  Oregon  tjrritory, 
but  still  farther  north,  are  facts  too  well  established  to  be  controverted  at  this  day. 

He  further  mentions  the  discovery  of  the  mouth  of  the  Columbia  prior  to 
Captain  Gray's  discovery,  and  refers  to  it  as  the  "incontestable  claim  to  the  dis- 
covery of  the  mouth  of  the  river  by  Heceta."  No  facts  are  presented  tending  to 
show  that  Louisiana  extended  so  far  west. 

In  his  second  argument,  or  reply,  he  again  declares  that  the  claim  of  the 
United  States  "rests  in  the  first  place  on  priority  of  discovery  sustained  by  their 
own  proper  claims  and  those  derived  from  Spain  through  the  treaty  of  Florida." 
He  makes  his  strong  point  against  the  British  claim,  and  in  favor  of  our  own, 
when  in  his  reply,  he  reminds  the  English  negotiator  of  the  latter's  fatal  admission 
in  his  argument,  conceding  that  Heceta,  August  15,  1775,  was  the  first  to  discover 
the  mouth  of  the  Columbia  River;  he  further  reminds  the  Englishman  "that 
Captain  Gray  was  the  first  to  pass  its  bar,  enter  its  mouth,  and  sail  up  its  stream." 


72  THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 

Mr.  Calhoun  in  this  reply,  while  outlining  somewhat  more  clearly  what  he  means 
by  "contijjnity  "  as  a  claim  through  the  Louisiana  cession,  by  coupling  that  claim 
with  our  purchase  of  Louisiana,  admits  that  France  never  claimed  Louisiana  as 
extending  beyond  the  Rockies,  when,  in  referring  to  the  French  claim,  he  said  the 
right  of  France  to  Louisiana  extended  "  to  the  region  drained  by  the  Mississippi 
and  its  waters,  on  the  ground  of  settlement  and  exploration."  It  is  difficult  to 
conceive  how,  on  such  a  basis,  France  could  deduce  a  claim,  through  contiguity,  to 
a  country  so  remote  and  separated  b\'  such  physical  obstacles  as  the  great  Rocky 
Mountain  range. 

THK   CLAIM    OF  CONTIGUITY. 

A  claim  west  of  the  Rockies,  through  our  purchase  of  Louisiana,  by  reason 
of  contiguity  is  especially  untenable,  because  the  western  limit  of  Louisiana 
was  sufficiently  definite,  it  being  known  that  the  highlands  at  the  head  of  the 
Mississippi  and  its  tributary  waters  constituted  the  boundary.  The  claim  of  con- 
tiguity most  often  arises  where  there  is  uncertainty  as  to  limit.  In  the  case  of 
the  discovery  and  exploration  of  a  river  it  extends  to  the  country  drained  by  that 
river.  This  being  determined  as  the  accepted  rule,  what  reasoning  can  justify  a 
claim  for  an  excess  of  territory  on  the  ground  of  contiguity?  Especially  is  it 
difficult  to  reconcile  such  claim  with  justice  where  such  excess  is  adversely  claimed, 
as  in  the  case  of  Spain  to  the  country  west  of  the  Rockies,  based  on  quite  good 
showing  of  long  prior  discovery  and  partial  settlement.  If  contiguity  is  to  be 
applied,  then,  on  this  basis  Spain  would  be  preferred,  since  her  acknowledged  pos- 
session and  dominion  of  the  California  country  brought  the  Oregon  country  to  the 
north  at  least  far  more  contiguous  to  her  possessions  than  it  was  to  the  country 
occupied  in  the  Louisiana  cession.  The  nations  of  the  earth  very  promptly  repudi- 
ated Spain's  claim  to  the  whole  of  the  western  continent,  based  on  her  early  dis- 
coveries of  a  small  portion.  England,  France  and  Portugal  were  likewise  denied 
recognition  of  claims  to  vast  regions  on  the  same  ground.  The  British  did  not 
claim  extension  of  territory  from  Hudson  Bay  on  the  ground  of  contiguity;  they 
justified  their  extension  by  right  of  exploration  and  discovery;  this  claim,  though 
denied  by  our  nation,  had  much  to  do  in  the  final  adjustment  of  the  British 
boundary,  not  only  in  the  recognition  by  Russia  of  Britain's  claim  south  of  54°  40', 
but  by  our  own  negotiators  and  countrymen  in  at  last  agreeing  that  the  line 
between  the  British  and  American  possessions  should  be  along  the  forty-ninth 
parallel.  Mr.  Calhoun  admits  that  the  claim  of  Spain  to  the  entire  continent,  on  the 
ground  of  contiguity,  by  reason  of  discovery  by  Columbus,  was  not  acquiesced  in 
by  other  nations.  He  also  admits  that  it  is  an  abstract  question  how  far  a  claim 
by  contiguity  can  extend  beyond  the  precise  spot  discovered  or  occupied,  and  that 
"it  is  siibject  in  each  case  to  be  influenced  by  avariety  of  considerations."  Accept- 
ing this  qualification,  it  may  be  submitted,  then,  that  in  the  case  of  the  westem 
boundary  of  the  Louisiana  cession,  a  very  strong  and  conclusive  consideration,  pre- 
cluding any  further  contention,  is  the  admitted  fact  that  so  well  known  a  physical 


THK    LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


73 


obstruction  as  the  ^^reat  Rocky  Mountain  ranj^e  stood  as  a  barrier  to  the  west,  and 
forms  the  hij^hlands  from  which  are  drained  the  waters  flowin<(  into  the  Mississippi, 
tlic  discovery  of  which  constitutes  the  French  claim  to  the  country  east  of  the 
Rocky  Mountains.  Can  it  not  be  said  when  a  claim  is  based  on  discovery  of  the 
mouth  of  a  river,  that  the  further  claim  of  contiguity  from  the  precise  spot  dis- 
covered is  limited  to  and  fully  met  by  including  all  the  country  drained  by  that 
river  and  its  tributaries?  That  Mr.  Calhoun  did  not  attach  much  importance  to 
his  contiguity  argument  in  his  able  presentation  of  our  nation's  claim,  is  evident 
from  his  reply  to  the  Ikitish  plenipotentiary,  when  he  said  :  "The  cession  of  Loui- 
siana gave  us  undisputed  title  west  of  the  Mississippi,  extending  to  the  summit 
of  the  Rocky  Mountains,  and  .south,  between  that  river  and  those  mountains,  to  the 
possessions  of  Spain."  Mr.  Buchanan,  as  vSecretary  of  State,  following  Mr.  Cal- 
houn, at  the  point  left  oflf  by  him,  relied  but  little  on  the  contiguity  claim,  as  he 
announced  that — 

The  title  of  the  United  States  to  that  portion  of  the  Oregon  territory  l)etween  the  valley  of  the 
Columbia  and  the  Russian  line  in  50°  40'  north  latitude  is  nrordcc/  in  the  Florida  treaty.  Under  this 
treaty,  dated  on  the  22d  of  Februarj-,  1819,  Spain  ceded  to  the  I'nited  States  all  her  rights,  claims,  and 
pretensions  to  any  territories  west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains  and  north  of  the  forty-second  parallel  of 
latitude.  We  contend  that  at  the  date  of  this  ce.ssion  Spain  had  a  good  title,  as  against  Great  Britain, 
to  the  whole  Oregon  territorj'. 

The  view  I  here  submit  as  to  the  doctrine  of  contiguity  is  approved  in  Lawrence's 
Principles  of  International  Law,  page  152,  which  holds  that — 

In  the  absence  of  natural  features,  the  boundary  of  the  contiguous  settlements  of  two  States 
should  be  drawn  midway  between  the  last  posts  on  either  side.  *  *  »  But  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  natural  boundaries  would  be  preferred  to  an  imaginary  line,  in  cases  where  they  exist. 

The  same  authority  admits  that  the  rights  of  sovereignty  gained  by  occupa- 
tion may  extend  beyond  the  actual  place  inhabited,  but,  it  adds,  "the  reasonable 
doctrine  of  expansion  must  not  be  pushed  to  absurd  lengths."  Modern  interna- 
tional law  does  not  sanction  IVIr.  Calhoun's  contiguity  claim  as  he  endeavored  to 
extend  it,  nor  have  I  found  any  authority  that  ever  did. 

Pomeroy's  International  Law,  page  105,  declares  that — 

It  is  evident  that  those  natural  boundaries  which  physical  geography  points  out — the  ranges  of 
mountains,  the  great  rivers  draining  large  basins,  the  gulfs  and  bays,  the  prominent  capes,  and  the 
trend  of  the  coast  line — nmst  have  great  influence  in  determining  the  limits  of  national  domain. 

A  claim  of  contiguity  is  sufficiently  met  by  conceding  to  the  nation  under 
whose  flag  the  mouth  of  a  river  is  discovered  all  the  country  drained  by  that  river; 
otherwise  a  natioti  would  be  restricted  to  the  preci.se  spot  on  which  its  people  first 
landed  or  settled.  To  claim  bey^  id  the  drainage  of  the  river,  on  the  theory  of 
contiguity,  would  be  as  unjust  and  nreasonable  as  to  limit  possession  by  actual 
occupancy.     These  are  two  extremes. 

The  contiguity  claim  of  Calhoun  in  reference  to  the  Louisiana  Purchase  was 
not  approved   by  Monroe   and  Pinckney,   the  American  negotiators   at  Madrid 


74 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


in  1803-1805,   where  the  question  of  territorial  extent  followinjj  discovery  was 
discussed.     The>'  contended  that — 

When  any  European  nation  claims  possession  of  any  extent  of  seacoast,  that  possession  is  under- 
stood as  extending  into  the  interior  country  to  the  sources  of  the  rivers  emptying  within  that  coast, 
to  all  their  branches,  and  the  country  they  cover. 

The.se  views  constitute  the  recognized  international  doctrine  of  contiguity, 
and,  as  so  held,  Mr.  Calhoun's  attempt  to  claim  Oregon  through  the  Louisiana 
Purchase  by  virtue  of  contiguity  can  not  be  sustained. 

It  has  been  asserted  by  some  that  the  British  claim  to  the  Pacific  Northwest 
was  defended  on  the  ground  of  contiguity,  based  upon  the  English  right  to  the 
Hudson  Bay  country.     Such,  however,  is  not  the  fact. 


SIR   ALEXANDER   Mi:KENZIE'S   EXPEDITION. 

The  first  exploration  of  the  continent,  and  the  first  success  in  discovering  a 
route  by  land  from  ocean  to  ocean,  was  that  by  Alexander  McKenzie  and  party, 
and  many  of  the  names  they  gave  to  rivers  and  mountains  along  their  memorable 
journey  remain  to-day  to  remind  us  of  the  intrepid  men  who  achieved  this  great 
triumph.  Two  years  after  his  voyage  down  the  McKenzie  river  to  its  entrance 
into  the  Arctic  Ocean,  and  on  his  return  to  Fort  Chepewyan  on  Ithabasca  Lake, 
McKenzie,  on  the  loth  day  of  October,  1792,  started  in  a  birch-bark  canoe  with  a 
few  fellow-voyagers  on  his  search  of  a  route  to  another  remote  point  on  the  great 
Pacific  Ocean.  He  followed  up  the  Peace  river  as  far  as  possible  to  a  point  in 
longitude  121°,  and  then  crossing  the  summit  of  the  mountains  came  upon  the 
waters  flowing  toward  the  Pacific;  which  bethought  to  be  the  Columbia  river, 
as  Fraser  also  thought  when  he  saw  it  thirteen  years  later,  and  to  which  he  sub- 
sequently gave  his  name  as  it  is  now  known,  Fraser  river,  but  which  was  then 
known  by  the  natives  as  the  Tacootche.  Over  rapids  and  through  narrow  and 
tortuous  channels,  the  descending  waters  broadened  and  spread  until  they  formed 
a  large-sized  river  which  McKenzie  followed  to  a  point  near  the  junction  of  the 
Blackwater,  or,  as  he  names  it  on  his  map,  the  West  Road  River;  and  there  he 
turned  his  course  more  directly  to  the  west,  and  on  the  morning  of  the  20th  of 
July,  1793,  the  great  object  of  his  journey  being  accomplished,  he  floated  on  the 
tide  waters  of  the  Pacific  Ocean.  Proceeding  southwesterly  he  reached  Point 
Menzes  on  the  coast,  .shown  by  Vancouver  on  his  map,  and  then  exploring  the 
Burke  and  Dean  canals  he  journeyed  up  the  Cascade  canal ;  all  o."  which  the 
British  navigator  had  surveyed  but  two  months  before  McKenzie  reached  his  last 
point,  and  there,  standing  above  the  waves  of  the  Pacific,  he  painted  on  a  rocky 
cliff"  overhanging  the  seashore,  in  memory  of  his  great  exploit,  these  words: 
"  Alexander  Mackenzie,  from  Canada  by  land  the  twenty-second  of  July,  one 
thousand  seven  hundred  and  ninety-three." 

This  early  claim  the  British  united  with  their  other  claims  by  virtue  of  coast 
discoveries,  and  their  much  stronger  claim  through  the  Nootka  Sound  Convention 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


75 


of  1790,  wherein  they  claimed  that  Spain  had  acknowledged  their  right  to  joint 
occupancy  and  settlement ;  and  they  relied  on  these  rather  than  through  con- 
tiguity to  Hudson  Bay. 

This  Nootka  claim  was  resisted  by  our  negotiators,  who  insisted  that  this 
right  was  merely  transient  and  did  not  interfere  with  Spain's  exclusive  sovereignty, 
and  that,  whatever  that  right  was,  it  was  annulled  by  the  war  between  Spain  and 
Britain  in  1796.  Yet,  with  all  this,  the  claim  was  of  great  weight  with  the  nego- 
tiators in  conceding  to  Britain  the  territory  lying  north  of  the  forty-ninth  parallel. 

NO   PROOF   THAT  OREGON   WAS   INCLUDED   IN   THE   LOUISIANA    PURCHASE. 

It  is  noticeable  in  all  the  authorities  asserting  the  Louisiana  Purchase  to 
extend  beyond  the  Rocky  Mountains  to  the  Pacific  that  no  substantial  support  is 
found  for  such  assumption  of  fact.  In  the  American  additions  to  Chambers 
Encyclopedia  the  assertion  is  made  that  Idaho,  Oregon  and  Washington  were 
embraced  within  the  Louisiana  territory.  No  authority  or  reason  is  given  for 
such  statement. 

In  Guthrie's  Universal  Geography,  Volume  I,  the  statement  is  made  that  the 
limits  of  Louisiana  extended  to  the  Pacific  Ocean.  No  proof  accompanies  this 
assertion. 

Russell's  History  of  the  United  States  claims  that  the  cession  included  "rot 
only  Louisiana  but  the  whole  country  from  the  Mississippi  to  the  Pacific."  It  is 
satisfied  with  this  mere  assertion. 

Olney's  History  of  the  United  States  contains  two  sentences  in  reference  to 
the  same  claim,  ending  with  the  bare  assertion:  "as  it  included  all  that  part  of  the 
country  west  of  the  Mississippi,  extending  to  Mexico  and  the  Pacific  Ocean." 
Other  histories  are  equally  deficient  in  proof  where  the  same  statement  is  made. 


OFFICIAL   DECLARATION   INCREASED   POPULAR    ERROR. 

Perhaps  no  publication  in  late  years  contributed  so  much  in  confirming  such 
erroneous  statements  as  did  the  official  declaration  made  in  the  census  reports  of 
1870. 

The  report  of  that  census  contains  a  map  which  represents  the  present  area 
of  Oregon,  Washington  and  Idaho  as  having  been  included  in  and  acquired 
through  the  Louisiana  Purchase  of  1803.  Coming  with  this  official  sanction  of 
the  government,  it  has  been  adopted  by  the  public  as  a  declaration  to  be  relied  on. 
Following  that  report  was  the  publication  of  the  Public  Domain,  prepared  pursu- 
ant to  acts  of  Congress  approved  March  3,  1879,  and  June  16,  1880.  This  contained 
a  map  on  the  plan  of  the  census  map,  and  was  an  acquiescence  in  the  error  of  the 
census  report  as  to  this  subject.  Since  then  various  historians  have  accepted  the 
statement  as  an  historic  truth  and  it  has  been  taught  in  the  schools  of  the  country. 
The  present  map,  as  published  by  the  Interior  Department,  and  which  is  to  be 


y6  "  THH   LOUISIANA    PURCHASE. 

corrected  hi  tluH  respect  in  a  new  publication,  is  copied  from  and  justified  by  the 
map  wliich  is  made  a  part  of  the  Ninth  Census  and  by  the  "Public  Domain." 
Thisoflfice  merely  followed  that  authority,  (ien.  F.  A.  Walker,  the  superintendent 
of  that  census,  when  called  ui)on  to  justify  his  official  representation,  replied  that, 
as  he  recalled  the  nejj^otiations,  our  jrovernment  made  claim  to  ( )rejfon  by  virtue  of 
the  Louisiana  Purchase.  Subsequently,  when  aj^ain  asked  by  a  leadinjr  educator 
his  reasons  for  representing  the  extension  beycmd  the  Rocky  Mountains,  he 
answered:  "I  am  free  to  confess  that  my  individual  views  do  not  coincide  there- 
with." Prof.  John  J.  Anderson,  Ph.D.,  a  well-known  author  of  many  historical 
publications,  and  of  a  widely  used  school  history  of  the  United  States,  in  an  able 
contribution,  entitled,  "  Did  the  Louisiana  Purchase  extend  to  the  Pacific  Ocean?" 
sums  up  his  conclusions  by  saying: 

Nowhere  have  we  seen  any  attempt  whatever  to  prove  that  any  part  of  the  region  west  of  the 
Rocky  Mountains  ever  belonged  to  I'rance,  or  that  France  ever  made  any  pretense  of  conveying  it  to 
the  United  States.     It  was  no  part  of  the  Louisiana  Purchase. 

McMaster's  History  of  the  people  of  the  United  States,"  [Volume  2,  page 
633]  expresses  substantially  the  same  view  in  the  following  language: 

Never  at  any  time  did  Oregon  form  part  of  Louisiana.  Marbois  denied  it.  Jefferson  denied  it. 
There  is  not  a  fragment  of  evidence  in  its  behalf.  Our  claim  to  Oregon  was  derived,  and  derived 
solely  from  the  Florida  Treaty  of  1819,  the  .settlement  at  Astoria,  the  explorations  of  Lewis  and  Clark, 
and  the  di.scovery  of  the  Columbia  river  by  Robert  Gray. 

Commenting  upon  the  same  error  in  the  present  General  Land  Office  map  of 
the  United  States,  Col.  James  O.  Broadhead,  of  St.  Louis,  a  distinguished  Ameri- 
can statesman  and  scholar,  in  a  recent  lecture  delivered  before  the  Missouri  His- 
torical Society,  entitled,  "The  Louisiana  Purchase  :  Extent  of  Territory  Acquired 
by  the  Purchase,"  very  critically  reviews  the  leading  authorities  upon  this  subject, 
and  expresses  his  own  judgment  by  saying  that  all  these  sources  of  information 
"establish  beyond  a  reasonable  doubt  the  fact  that  by  the  treaty  of  1803  the  terri- 
tory ceded  by  France  to  the  LTnited  States  embraced  only  the  territory  watered  by 
the  Mississippi  and  Missouri  rivers  and  their  tributaries." 

JEFFERSON,  MARBOIS,  AND    GREENHOW. 

If  there  were  no  other  proofs  as  to  the  Louisiana  cession  not  extending  west- 
ward of  the  Rocky  Mountains  the  declarations  of  three  men  alone  should  be  con- 
clusive; they  are  those  of  Jefferson,  the  President  of  our  Republic,  who  did  so 
much  to  accomplish  the  cession ;  Marbois,  minister  of  France,  who  earnestly 
seconded  Napoleon's  desire  to  cede ;  and  Greenhow,  the  historian,  who  perhaps 
gave  to  the  subject  more  exhaustive  study  than  any  other  man.  Greenhow  was 
librarian  of  the  State  Department  of  the  United  States,  and  prepared  a  most  com- 
prehensive report  to  Congress  on  the  subject,  and  at  a  time  when  every  contribu- 
tion relating  to  the  discussion  was  closely  read.  He  also  published  a  history  of 
California  and  Oregon,  in  which  he  reviews  this  subject  of  the  Louisiana  cession. 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


n 


President  Jefferson's  instructions  thronj^h  Mr.  Madison,  his  Secretary  of  State, 
to  Monroe  and  Pinckney,  July  30,  1807,  expressed  and  explained  the  terms  on  which 
they  were  directed  to  close  the  treaty,  and  contains  this  lanjjiiajje  as  to  boundaries : 

This  is  in  ud  view  whiiti-vur  ncccssiiry,  and  can  have  little  otluT  c-fTuct  than  as  an  offensive  iiiti- 
inatiun  to  Sjiaiii  that  onr  claims  extend  to  the  Pacific  Ocean.  However  reasonahle  snch  claims  may  lie 
compared  with  others,  it  is  impolitic,  especially  at  the  present  tnoment,  to  strengthen  Spanish  jeal- 
ousies of  the  United  States,  which  it  is  prol)al)ly  an  object  with  tireat  Hritain  to  excite  by  the  clanse  in 
question. 

Another  statement  from  Mr.  Jefferson — and  four  years  earlier-  is  in  his  letter 
to  Mr.  Hreckenridge,  which  I  subjoin  in  full,  so  far  as  it  refers  to  the  Louisiana 
boundaries : 

MONTICELW,  August  li,  fSoj. 

To  Mr.  Hrkckknridok. 

I)H.\R  Sir, — The  enclosed  letter,  though  directed  to  you,  was  intended  to  me  also,  and  was  left 
open  with  a  request,  that  when  forwarded,  I  would  forwanl  it  to  you.  It  gives  me  occasioti  to  write 
a  word  to  you  on  the  subject  of  Louisiana,  which  being  a  new  one,  an  interchange  of  sentiments  may 
produce  correct  ideas  before  we  are  to  act  on  them. 

Our  information  as  to  the  country  is  very  incomplete;  we  have  taken  measures  to  obtain  it  full 
as  to  the  .settled  jiart,  which  I  ho])e  to  receive  in  time  for  Congress.  The  boundaries,  which  I  deem 
not  admitting  question,  are  the  highlands  on  the  western  side  of  the  Mississippi  enclosing  all  its 
waters,  the  Missouri,  of  course,  and  terminating  in  the  line  drawn  from  the  northwestern  point  of 
the  Lake  of  the  Woods  to  the  nearest  source  of  the  Jlissi.s.sippi,  as  lately  settled  between  Cireat 
Britain  and  the  United  States.  We  have  some  claims  to  extend  on  the  seacoa.st  we.stwardly  to  the 
Rio  Norte  or  Bravo,  and  better,  to  go  eastwardly  to  the  Rio  Perdido,  between  Mobile  and  I'ensacola, 
the  ancient  boundary  of  Louisiana.  These  claims  will  be  a  .subject  of  negotiation  with  Spain,  and 
if,  as  soon  as  she  is  at  war,  we  push  them  strongh-  with  one  hand,  hokling  out  a  price  in  the 
other,  we  shall  certainly  obtain  the  Ploridas,  and  all  in  good  time.     *    *    * 

This  treaty  must  of  course  be  laid  before  both  Houses. 

Another  letter  to  General  Gates,  about  the  same  time,  is  also  in  point: 

Washington,////)'//   /Soj, 
To  General  Gates. 

Dear  Generai,,— I  accept  with  pleasure,  and  with  pleasure  reciprocate  your  congratulations  on 
the  acquisition  of  Louisiana;  for  it  is  a  subject  of  mutual  congratulation,  as  it  interests  every  man  of 
the  nation.  The  territory  acquired,  as  it  includes  all  the  waters  of  the  Mi-ssouri  and  Mississippi, 
has  more  than  doubled  the  area  of  the  United  States,  and  the  new  parts  is  not  inferior  to  the  old  in 
soil,  climate,  productions  and  important  communications.     *    *    * 

Marbois,  in  his  History  of  Louisiana,  referring  to  the  extent  of  the  Louisiana 
cession,  says: 

The  shores  of  the  western  ocean  were  certainly  not  included  in  the  cession,  but  the  United  States 
are  already  established  there.     (See  p.  286. ) 

Marbois  again  says: 

The  charter  given  by  Louis  XIV  to  Crozat  included  all  the  countries  watered  by  the  rivers  which 
empty  directly  or  indirectly  into  the  Mississippi.  Within  this  description  comes  the  Missouri,  a  river 
that  has  its  sources  and  many  of  its  tributary  streams  at  a  little  distance  from  the  Rocky  Mountains. 
The  first  article  of  the  treaty  of  cession  to  the  United  States  meant  to  convey  nothing  beyond  them, 
but  the  settlement  in  the  interior,  which  has  resulted  from  it,  and  the  one  on  the  Pacific  Ocean  at  the 
■west  have  mutually  strengthened  each  other.     (See  p.  291. ) 


H 


78  THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 

Greenhow,  in  his  History  of  California  and  Oregon,  commenting  on  the 
boundaries  of  the  Louisiana  Purchase,  says: 

In  the  absence  of  more  direct  light  on  the  subject  from  history  we  are  forced  to  regard  the 
boundaries  indicated  by  nature— namely,  the  highlands  separating  the  waters  of  the  Mississippi  from 
those  flowing  into  the  Pacific  or  the  California  Gulf —as  the  true  western  boundaries  of  the  Louisiana 
ceded  by  France  to  Spain  in  1762,  retroceded  to  France  in  1800,  and  transferred  to  the  United  States 
by  France  in  1803. 

France,  at  the  time  of  the  cession,  did  not  claim  any  territory  west  of  the 
Rocky  Mountains,  but  did  concede  the  dominion  of  Spain  to  that  country,  as 
Spain  then,  and  before,  claimed  the  same.  In  support  of  this  assertion  we  have 
the  official  declaration  of  Talleyrand,  the  French  minister,  to  the  Spanish  Govern- 
ment (August  31,  1804,  Talleyrand  to  Gravine),  as  follows: 

In  any  case  the  Court  of  Madrid  would  have  no  ground  for  the  fear  it  shows  that  the  Unit  d 
States  ma}'  make  use  of  their  possession  of  Louisiana  in  order  to  form  possessions  on  the  northwest 
coast  of  America.  Whatever  boundary  may  be  agreed  upon  between  Spain  and  the  United  States,  the 
line  will  necessarily  be  so  far  removed  from  the  western  co  ,L  of  America  as  to  relieve  the  Court  of 
Madrid  from  an.xiety  on  that  score. 

These  evidences  from  the  highest  and  most  authentic  sources,  and  these 
expressions  from  men  who  lived  in  the  times  when  this  great  question  was  most 
closely  and  critically  examined,  constitute  the  best  authority,  and  should  be  finally 
and  forever  conclusive  upon  the  controversy  as  to  the  extent  of  the  Louisiana 
Purchase. 

Having  reached  this  conclusion  as  to  the  western  boundary  of  the  cession 
from  France  history  equally  justifies  us  in  our  claim  to  the  Oregon  country  to  the 
westward  of  the  cession,  now  embracing  the  States  of  Oregon,  Washington  and 
Idaho,  and  portions  of  Montana  and  Wyoming  as  resting  on  and  derived  through — 

First.  Discovery  and  entrance  of  the  mouth  of  the  Columbia  River  by  Capt. 
Robert  Gray  in  1792. 

Second.  Exploration  by  Lewis  and  Clarke  in  1805. 

Third.  Settlement  and  occupation  by  the  Astoria  party  in  181 1. 

Fourth.  Relinquishment  of  the  rights  of  Spain  by  the  treaty  of  1819. 

Therefore  the  Cession  Map  of  the  United  States  should  be  made  to  conform 
to  facts  well  established  and  long  confirmed  by  history,  with  which,  I  respectfully 
submit,  the  position  assumed  in  this  review  of  the  question  is  in  complete  accord. 


A  REVIEW  OF  ANNEXATION  BY  THE  UNITIH)  STATES. 


EARLY  OBJECTIONS  TO   ANNEXATION    ANALYZED. 

Annexation  and  affiliation  witliin  the  confines  of  the  great  American  Republic 
have  become  the  popular  thought  of  the  people  inhabiting  the  countries  adjoining 
or  near  our  shores.  There  is  a  magnetism  about  the  old  flag  which  attracts  these 
people  to  us.  It  means  t^  them  freedom  and  humanity.  It  means  greater  oppor- 
tunities. This  was  the  feeling  in  Florida,  in  Texas,  in  California  and  in  Oregon. 
Eighteen  great  States  and  four  prosperous  Territories  and  Districts,  with  Hawaii, 
comprise  the  domain  acquired  by  annexation  from  foreign  powers — vastly  exceed- 
ing in  area  that  wrested  from  our  British  ancestors  by  the  Revolutionary  war- — 
and  all  within  the  lifetime  of  many  still  living. 

There  are  in  the  present  American  Congress  24  Senators  and  65  Representa- 
tives from  States  within  the  limits  of  the  Louisiana  Purchase ;  from  this,  and  our 
other  foreign  acquisitions,  there  are  to-day  in  that  Congress  40  Senators  and  97 
Representatives  and  Delegates.  Though  innumerable  advantages  have  accrued 
to  our  nation  by  territorial  expansion,  and  though  we  have  become  greater  and 
stronger  with  each  increase  of  our  area  and  acquired  population,  yet  every  effort 
to  expand  our  domain  has  been  antagonized  by  many  of  our  own  people.  Some 
very  specious  arguments,  as  hereinbefore  shown,  have  been  advanced  in  opposition, 
but  the  experience  of  our  nation  during  many  years  enable  us  now  to  refute  the 
different  positions  assumed. 

Remoteness. — The  objection  to  cession  of  foreign  territory  especially  because  of 
remoteness  has  been  urged  in  the  past  to  all  our  accessions.  That  this  has  neither 
resulted  to  the  injury  of  our  union  nor  to  our  institutions  we  have  evidences  all 
around  us.  We  observe  that  Hawaii  is  more  accessible  to  the  United  States  to- 
day than  were  the  settled  portions  of  Louisiana  in  Jefferson's  time,  or  of  Florida 
in  that  of  Monroe,  and  indeed  nearer,  as  well  as  more  accessible,  than  was  Oregon 
during  Polk's  administration.  To  the  answer  that  these  acquisitions  were  neither 
interrupted  by  foreign  dominion,  nor  by  oceans,  we  turn  to  Alaska.  We  find  that 
District  not  only  incontiguous,  but  separated  by  a  foreign  country.  It  is  also  a 
.  fact  that  all  communication  with  that  distant  people  and  with  our  civil  gov- 
ernment there  is  by  ocean;  the  distance  from  Seattle  to  Sitka  by  steamer  or  sailing 
vessel  being  900  miles,  and  from  Seattle  to  St.  Michaels,  at  the  moutli  of  the  Yukon, 
it  is  2,705  miles.  Hawaii  is  nearer  the  American  mainland  than  are  some  of  our 
Aleutian  Islands.     California  when  admitted  into  thf»  Union  was  far  more  inacces- 

79 


8o 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


sible  than  is  Hawaii  to-day.  Gen.  Joseph  Lane,  the  first  Territorial  governor  of 
Oregon,  desired  to  reach  that  destination  as  early  as  possible,  so  as  to  proclaim 
the  Federal  authority  over  that  Territory  before  the  expiration  of  President 
Polk's  term,  on  March  4,  1849.  ^^  departed  with  his  coninnssion  from  Indiana 
on  August  27,  1848,  and  journeyed  via  Fort  Leavenworth,  vSanta  Fe,  El  Paso, 
and  thence  to  California,  where  at  San  Pedro  Bay  he  took  passage  on  a  sailing 
vessel  and  was  conveyed  to  San  Francisco.  Here,  finding  a  ship  bound  for  the 
Cohnnbia  river,  he  was  transported  to  Oregon,  where  he  arrived  on  the  ist  of 
March  following — the  journey  occupying  about  six  months! 

President  Polk,  in  a  message  to  Congress,  thought  it  might  be  practicable  to 
establish  an  overland  mail  once  a  mouth,  and  so  advised. 

Now,  this  distance  is  traversed  in  five  days  with  comfort  and  safety,  and  for 
reasonable  compensation.  By  our  modern  contrivances  time,  distance  and  danger 
are  largely  overcome  in  transportation  from  point  to  point.  The  wagon  and  the 
stage-coach  are  distanced  and  surpassed  by  the  steam  car ;  the  sail  has  for  quick 
dispatch  given  way  to  steam  ;  the  wooden  vessel  has  been  supplanted  by  the  iron 
ship;  and  expedition  in  communication  and  correspondence  between  individuals 
is  accomolished  through  the  fast  mail,  the  telegraph,  and  the  telephone. 

THE   CONSTITUTIONALITY   OF   ANNEXATION. 

The  doubt  entertained  as  to  the  right  under  the  Constitution  to  acquire 
possession  of  foreign  teiritory  has  been  answered  by  the  several  acquisitions  made 
since  that  of  Louisiana,  as  well  as  by  the  judgments  of  the  highest  courts  and  in 
the  opinions  and  writings  of  our  most  illustrious  jurists.  Chief  Justice  Marshall, 
rendering  the  opinion  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  in  the  case  of  The 
American  Insurance  Company  v.  Canter,  said : 

The  Constitution  confers  absolutely  on  the  Government  of  the  Union  the  power  of  making  wars 
and  making  treaties,  consequently  the  Government  possesses  the  power  of  acquiring  territory  either 
by  conquest  or  treaty. 

Th'='  Supreme  Court  again,  in  another  celebrated  case.  The  Mormon  Church  v. 
The  United  States  (136  U.  S.  R.),  said: 

The  power  of  acquiring  territory  is  derived  from  the  treaty-making  power  and  the  power  to  declare 
and  carry  on  war.  *  *  *  The  antecedents  of  these  powers  are  those  of  national  sovereignty,  and 
belong  to  all  independent  governments. 

The  further  provision  of  the  Constitution  conferring  on  Congress  the  power 
to  provide  for  the  common  defense  and  to  promote  the  general  welfare  implies 
also  the  authority,  when  necessary,  to  acquire  territory.  It  is  a  power  inherent  in 
the  fundamental  nature  of  government,  and  involves  a  principle  of  maintenance, 
of  defense,  of  perpetuity. 

There  have  been  many  Executive  interpretations  of  the  Constitution  in 
consonance  with  these  views  in  treaties  through  which  we  acquired  the  larger 


:: 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


Si 


part  of  our  domain,  and  in  several  other  treaties  negotiated  for  foreign  territory, 
which  were  never  consummated  by  ratification,  such  as  Hawaii  in  1854,  Santo 
Domingo  in  1870,  Hawaii  again  in  1893,  and  still  later  in  1897.  Congress  has 
also  giver  its  assent  to  the  doctrine  at  different  times  in  on  history.  Having  thus 
the  acceptance  of  the  executive,  the  legislative,  and  the  judicial  departments  of 
the  government,  it  should  now  be  regarded  as  an  established  right. 

ANNEXATION   AN   ELEMENT  OF  STRENGTH. 

To  the  argument  used  as  to  annexation  being  a  source  of  weakness,  our  experi- 
ence has  proven  it  to  be  an  element  of  strength.  As  bases  of  supply  in  war  time 
we  have  been  taught  that  many  of  our  accessions  have  been  invaluable.  Our  great 
battle  ships  are  propelled  by  steam,  and  coal  for  fuel  is  indispensable.  Bases  of 
supply  must  be  had.  Our  warships  crossing  the  ocean,  or  distant  from  the  main- 
land, and  with  exhausted  coal  bunkers  meeting  the  enemy  will  invite  destruction. 
Stress  of  weather,  disabled  machinery,  or  other  accidents  produce  delay.  If  relief 
is  sotight  in  neutral  ports  they  will  be  closed  against  the  ship's  necessities  except 
under  certain  restrictions.  Modern  invention  has  given  rise  to  this  necessity  for 
fuel  supply.  In  former  years  our  ships  of  war  were  propelled  by  wind  and  sail, 
and  a  distant  base  of  supply  was  a  matter  of  comparative  indifference.  Outlying 
points  overlooking  the  mainland,  or  in  the  track  of  our  commerce,  afford  means 
for  defensive  operations  in  time  of  need  which  no  nation  should  disregard.  Terri- 
torial defense,  protection  against  military  or  naval  attack,  and  avoidance  of  conflict 
with  numerous  adjoining  powers  are  advantages  which  we  have  gained  through 
annexation. 

The  nations  of  the  Old  World  are  in  frequent  disputes  and  sometimes  wars 
arising  over  boundary  disputes,  customs  violations,  and  clash  of  jurisdictions, 
requiring  large  standing  armies  to  resist  invasion  or  to  punish  real  or  fancied 
wrongs. 

International  complications  rarely  occur  with  us  because  of  our  immunity 
from  such  elements  of  discord  and  the  legion  of  controversies  which  originate 
among  close  neighbors  having  rival  interests.  Our  brief  experience  with  Florida 
and  with  Louisiana  when  under  Spanish  control  gave  us  an  object  lesson  of  the 
effect  of  undesirable  neighbors.  Territorial  expansion  may,  therefore,  be  justified 
as  a  war  measure  as  well  as  upon  grounds  of  commercial  necessity. 


HOMOGENEITY   NOT  A  SERIOUS  OBJECTION. 

To  the  further  objection  that  the  populations  of  annexed  foreign  territory  are 
not  homogeneous  with  our  own,  we  have  discovered  from  experience  that  this  is 
no  serious  objection  in  the  end.  In  all  of  our  cessions  we  have  had  a  mixture  of 
races  to  contend  with.  With  Florida  we  acquired  a  Spanish  and  Indian  popula- 
tion; with  Texas  the  Spaniard,  the  Mexican,  and  the  Indian;  with  California  the 
2239 6 


82 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


same;  with  Louisiana  we  had  the  Spaniard,  the  Frenchman,  and  the  Indian,  and 
with  Alaska  we  had  the  Russian  and  the  Eskimo. 

It  has  in  all  cases  been  demonstrated  that  the  stronger  races  dominate.  The 
American  element  proves  in  every  contest  for  supremacy  to  be  the  stronger.  It 
is  a  great  colonizer  and  educates  as  it  advances.  Wherever  it  goes  our  institu- 
tions go  with  it.  Before  it  the  foreign  element  becomes  Americanized  in  a  brief 
period.     It  is  a  formidable  missionary. 

A  further  check  is  provided  against  possible  danger  of  racial  conflict  or  lack 
of  homogeneity  in  the  population — so  far  as  the  purposes  of  our  civil  form  of 
government  may  be  perverted  by  the  participation  in  its  affairs  of  elements 
alien  and  antagonistic — in  the  exclusion  of  such  elements  from  the  exercise  of 
governmental  functions.  They  are  never  at  the  time  of  accession  admitted  or 
accepted  as  citizens  with  political  rights.  When  they  shall  enjoy  such  privileges 
is  a  matter  which  is  left  entirely  with  Congress.  In  the  meanwhile  they  are 
required  to  undergo  a  probation  or  pupilage  which  in  the  course  of  time  will  fit 
them  to  become  the  giiardians  of  republican  institutions.  A  long  period  may 
intervene  before  they  may  be  allowed  to  enjoy  a  territorial  form  of  government, 
with  its  restricted  privileges,  and  thereafter  a  still  longer  period  may  ensue  before 
statehood  will  follow  to  confer  the  highest  rights  of  citizenship.  A  perpetual 
check  is  thus  provided  by  the  Constitution  against  the  incorporation  into  our 
political  system  of  state  or  national  government  of  l  n  element  unfitted  to  con- 
trol. To  argue  that  this  restraint  is  insufficient  or  may  be  disregarded  is  to  reflect 
upon  the  intelligence,  the  integrity,  and  the  patriotism  of  the  people's  repre- 
sentatives in  the  Congress  of  all  the  States  of  our  Union.  Of  this  Congress  is 
the  best  judge,  and  can  always  be  depended  upon  when  to  admit  these  territorial 
accessions  into  the  Union  as  States,  and  thus  far  this  high  trust  has  been  discharged 
with  eminent  satisfaction  and  discretion.  No  Territory  will  be  admitted  into  the 
Union  until  the  people  shall  have  demonstrated  their  capacity  for  statehood,  and, 
even  when  admitted,  Congress  can  legislate  such  limitations  and  restrictions  as 
shall  best  conserve  the  public  interests,  as  it  can  exclude  and  prohibit  any  undesir- 
able people  from  becoming  residents  of  our  country. 


ANNEX.\TION    BY  OTHER   NATIONS   AND  THKIR   FOREIGN   ELEMENTS. 

The  adoption  of  different  racial  elements  in  the  body  politic  is  the  history 
of  the  ages.  All  nations  have  gone  through  this  ordeal.  Great  Britain  is  an 
appropriate  illustration.  She  has  assimilated  the  most  diverse  beings,  and  from 
the  most  unfavorable  conditions  brought  them  under  highly  enlightened  and 
Christianizing  influences;  she  has  made  them  as  thoroughly  British  in  senti- 
ment and  industrial  habits  as  the  people  of  England  themselves,  and  her  colonial 
possessions  are  to-day  the  strength  and  glory  of  that  great  Empire.  Like  France, 
Holland  and  Portugal,  England  has  more  inhabitants  in  her  colonial  possessions 
than  she  has  at  home.  At  home  she  has  39,825,000,  while  in  her  colonies  she 
has  322,000,000.  At  home  France  has  38,520,000,  and  in  her  colonies  44,290,000. 
Portugal  has  5,050,000  at  home  and  10,215,000  in  her  colonies.     The  area  of  the 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


«3 


German  Empire  proper  is  but  one-fifth  that  of  her  colonial  possessions,  while 
the  area  of  England's  colonial  possessions  is  eighty  times  as  great  as  the  home 
country.  This  mere  statement  necessarily  im])lies  the  diverse  character  of  the 
races  which  go  to  make  up  the  population  of  the  widel)-  scattered  possessions  of 
these  nations.  Nor  can  it  be  said  that  these  mighty  powers  have  become  enervated 
or  denationalized  in  spirit  or  threatened  in  unity  because  of  their  annexations  or 
distant  colonial  possessions. 


lie 


AN  OBJECT   LESSON   IN   ENGLAND'S   ASSIMILATION   OF  RACES. 

An  illustration  as  forcible  as  it  was  beauL'ful  of  the  success  in  the  cementing 
and  assimilating  of  Britain's  widely  different  colonial  elements  was  witnessed  in 
the  city  of  London  the  past  year  at  the  Queen's  Jubilee  in  commemoration  of  the 
sixtieth  anniversary  of  her  reign.  There  were  assembled  in  the  mighty  concourse 
present  representatives  from  each  of  the  British  colonies  who  came  to  do  honor 
and  to  express  their  fealty  to  the  great  head  of  the  consolidated  Empire.  As  an 
object  lesson  of  the  strength  of  the  several  remote  possessions,  their  military  was 
most  conspicuous  in  the  magnificent  cavalcade.  Troops  were  there  from  Canada, 
India,  New  South  Wales,  Hongkong,  Cape  Colony,  Jamaica,  New  Zealand,  Aus- 
tralia, and  other  portions  of  the  English  domain — in  all,  the  military  of  twenty- 
five  colonies  were  in  the  march.  The  native  troops  were  there.  The  black  and 
the  bronzed  faces  proclaimed  their  racial  status.  Some  wore  the  fez,  some  the  red 
cap,  some  the  gay  colored  turban,  .some  the  Chinese  head  covering,  and  so  on, 
while  the  uniforms  displayed  were  even  more  varied  in  style  and  color.  There 
were  exhibited  the  same  proud  tread  in  the  movements  and  the  same  loyal  devo- 
tion in  the  faces  of  the  dragoons  of  Manitoba,  the  infantrymen  of  the  West  Indies, 
the  hussars  and  lancers  of  New  South  Wales,  and  the  North  Borneo  policemen, 
as  were  seen  in  the  Royal  Dragoons  of  London. 

As  showing  the  wealth,  strength  and  power  which  have  come  to  Great  Britain 
through  annexation  within  Queen  Victoria's  reign,  it  will  be  of  interest  to  read 
the  recent  comments  of  Gen.  Nelson  A.  IMiles,  of  the  United  States  Army  (see 
McClure's  Magazine  for  July,  1898),  upon  the  secret  of  England's  mighty  prestige. 
He  says: 

111  1837,  when  Victoria  was  crowned,  the  entire  white  colonial  population  was  only  1,250,000. 
To-tlay  it  is  over  10,000,000.  At  that  inie  India  was  not  yet  a  direct  dependency  of  the  Crown,  but 
was  .still  under  the  rule  of  the  East  India  Company.  Hongkong  had  not  been  added  as  a  military 
outpo.st,  nor  was  nearly  .so  large  a  part  of  the  Malay  Peninsula  under  British  control.  In  all  Australia, 
in  1837,  there  were  only  about  100,000  British  colonists  -.scattered  in  Tasmania,  New  Zealand,  and 
South  .\u.stralia — and  most  of  these  were  supposed  to  be  felons  and  convicts.  The  interior  of  Australia 
was  entirely  unexplored.  The  resources  were  unknown,  its  future  undreamed.  To-day  Australia  is 
made  up  of  .seven  rich  provinces  and  has  a  population  of  4,o(X),ooo  as  loyal,  intelligent,  and  progressive 
British  subjects  as  exi.st  on  the  globe. 

In  South  Africa  sixtj'  years  ago  the  English  domain  was  confined  to  the  southern  point  of  t4ie 
continent ;  to-day  it  extends,  with  only  one  important  break,  from  the  Cape  to  the  .sources  of  the  Nile. 
When  Victoria  ascended  the  throne  the  British  in  North  America  were  nearly  all  gathered  in  Ontario 
and  Quebec,  and  the  Hudson  Bay  Company  occupied  all  the  central  and  western  provinces  of  what  is 


84 


THE   LOUISIANA   PURCHAvSE. 


now  known  as  the  Canadian  Dominion.  Rritish  Columbia  was  an  unknown  waste,  only  to  be  reached 
bj-  a  terrible  sea  voyage  around  Cape  Horn.  Yet  to-day  the  Imperial  Government  is  in  force  over  all 
this  va.st  territory.  London  is  now  only  ten  days  from  Vancouver,  and  every  year  is  seeing  the  devel- 
opment of  new  resources  by  a  territory  once  believed  to  be  useless  except  as  a  fur-producing  country. 

OUR   FURTHER   DESTINY. 

When  we  pause  to  review  the  marveloii.s  development  and  expansion  of  om- 
own  country  since  the  immortal  proclamation  of  freedom  was  first  announced 
from  Independence  Hall,  Pliiladelphia,  and  realize  that  but  little  over  a  century 
measures  the  interval  of  time  during  which  the  colossal  Republic  has  reached  a 
limit  of  forty-five  great  States,  with  several  important  Territories  and  Districts, 
each  one  of  which  is  comparable  as  an  equal  with  some  nation  in  the  old  world, 
and  all  of  these  magnificent  civisions,  including  Hawaii,  under  one  flag,  one  con- 
stitution, and  one  indissoluble  and  glorious  union,  may  we  not  indulge  in  prophetic 
thought  as  to  the  wondrous  revelations  which  the  next  few  years  of  our  history 
must  unfold?  We  have  already  become  the  greatest  agricultural,  the  greatest 
manufitcturing,  and  the  greatest  mining  nation.  According  to  Mulhall  we  are 
now  the  wealthiest  of  all  the  nations.  We  have  become  the  second  greatest 
commercial  nation,  and  are  rapidly  approaching  first  place.  As  a  military  and 
naval  power,  we  have  made  a  history  within  the  preset  year,  which  has  moved 
the  American  people  to  the  front  rank  before  the  world.  What  shall  be  the  further 
destiu\-  of  this  nation?  Grand  and  unprecedented  as  has  been  our  past,  we  are 
now  emerging  upon  an  era  still  more  resplendent,  and  far  superior  to  anything 
that  has  gone  before  in  our  history.  Our  horizon  has  broadened  and  increased. 
That  which  before  in  many  things  was  a  mere  interest  has  now  become  a  necessitv. 
None  can  jjredict  the  mighty  sweep  of  the  present  evolution.  It  is  destiny.  New 
domains,  new  responsibilities,  and  new  demands  are  before  us.  Our  possessions  in 
the  distant  seas  will  call  for  such  government  and  such  international  policy  as  was 
never  before  required  in  our  affairs.  For  this  reason  we  must  rely  in  the  future 
more  upon  our  Navy.  This  realization  has  already  been  brought  home  to  us  and 
we  are  profiting  by  the  lesson.  Fifteen  years  ago  we  ranked  twelfth  in  maritime 
strength  among  the  nations  while  now  we  have  become  the  fifth,  if  not  the  fourth 
naval  power.  We  are  also  entering  upon  an  age  of  competition.  What  protection 
shall  our  vast  and  growing  foreign  and  domestic  commerce  receive? 


OUR   INCREASING  COMMERCE. 

•  The  Bureau  of  Statistics  of  the  Treasury  Department  oflficially  assures  us 
that  the  exports  of  our  country  for  the  year  ended  June  30,  1898,  exceed  the 
enormous  value  of  $1,200,000,000.  No  month  since  last  August  has  fallen  below 
195,000,000,  while  the  exports  for  May  last  amounted  to  $110,239,206. 

The  imports  for  the  same  year  exceed  $600,000,000  in  value.  It  can  now  be 
said  that  our  exports  are  double  in  value  to  our  imports.  We  are  selling  twice  as 
much  as  we  are  buying — a  most  inspiring  spectacle — and  a  result  as  commendable 
and  significant  in  the  affairs  of  a  nation  as  in  those  of  an  individual.      I  have 


.^(' 


r>J| 


O.m) 


'''  ""iJTifi^ 


"*»«?»  H.^ 


y 


/ 


/ 


•Mr 


Oi.if    ^  I.  ,1, 


»/.   1/   >Iy 


I.. 


V 


( 


'■'  I  ; 


/I 


*v^*^■^••^^ 


,.t 


•'M.H  L 


-.^     " 


^/.\\\]y. 


A.t   l/>| 


•  t( 


'■y. 


S, 


9i'or-    ^virj-.v 


> 


'■■'  ' -^vsV,-,    v)5    r;<^'^^^,f.    Cry:,, 


\ 


15- 


.V,  * 


'i.» 


tc 


<;/ 


«?., 


:i/ 


M: 


^^Mf^^nm 


.n 


f'3! 


'■)(?• 


-.VS;...vVJv'%7-,  ^f   ^VJiwSB.luw 


* 
I    I  iiiii  III 


Comp  tied  on  d  drann  6y  £./?f/ouff>.       1 60 


\vA  v^v;.i:K-.:i.?  '■.■^. 


Map  of  the 

HAWAIIAN  IS 

Area.  6.040  Square 


157" 


Map  oF  the 

IAN  ISLANDS. 

1.6.040  Square  Miles. 


["I  '^lintiiwkipcc  PHO'S  uTrtimra 


Misf liners  givfri    aiv  in   .Statute    .  \Wcs. 


>iWl»*M>l>— lltl  Will  I   *    I 


•iff 


;'^-; 


■J  .-*>■'- 


(tvK--^    '^' 


.,\ 


,>»^ 


■^iv: 


..*-^' 


V-JS     «»-* 


■*    X 


\ 


^> 


o 


(I  . 

■'«• 


\ 


\ 


V 


'S//- 


M  \\   > 


\  -^ 


11/:/// II 


If 


«M«<>,*u«. 


^(•s^^  *;'' 


j' 


■     -.  ■-,        \n  ■•   -   Ui 


I 


•\  'A  «,w^-  >v  - 


V'.  ■-. 


^■c. 


Of 


;.!'/>{ 


^:.l' 


^Vr 


..j-^i- 


/  r  -' 


'..«.' 


:1. 


>n^—K^UWli  III   H  II 


?2f 


'■^\ 


THK   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 


85 


found  no  other  instance  within  the  century  where  tlie  exports  of  a  nation  have  been 
double  the  imports.  Indeed,  it  is  said  this  record  is  without  a  parallel  in  the 
annals  of  the  world!  To  maintain  this  splendid  reputation  and  to  excel  this  hij^h 
standard  amon^  all  nations,  it  is  essential  that  we  shall  anticipate  our  further 
dcvelojMnent  in  the  near  future  and  wisely  avail  ourselves  of  such  acquisition  of 
territory,  naval  and  coaling  stations  and  such  advantajj^cs  by  treaties  and  commer- 
cial aj^reements  as  shall  enable  us  not  only  to  enlarge  the  scope  of  our  export 
traffic  and  further  multiply  the  market  places  for  our  varied,  wondrotis,  and 
rapidly  increasing  productions,  but  also  to  protect  and  defend  the  trade  which 
shall  follow  the  flag. 

Is  the  imperial  domain  which  is  now  the  Republic  to  remain  content  with  its 
present  advance,  or  is  it  written  for  the  future  that  accession  and  annexation  shall 
still  further  progress  until  we  shall  secure  the  island  approaches  in  the  Atlantic 
which  under  foreign  flags  and  rival  nations  still  menace  the  way  to  the  Gulf  ports 
and  to  the  great  river  which  carries  to  the  markets  of  the  world  the  rich  commerce 
of  manv  of  the  States  of  the  Union? 


HAWAII. 

It  is  now  already  written  that  on  the  Pacific  side  of  our  Republic  and  along 
the  track  of  our  increasing  and  lucrative  commerce  with  the  Occident  and  the 
Orient,  the  islands  which  lie  to  the  westward  and  face  the  California  shores  are 
ours.  These  aggregate  in  area  6,040  square  miles — nearly  the  combined  area  of 
the  States  of  Connecticut  and  Delaware.  They  contain  the  little  republic  which 
has  long  prospered  under  the  stinnilus  of  American  euterpri.se  and  capital,  until 
at  last  95  per  cent  of  its  property  values  represent  the  possessions  of  our  own 
kindred.  As  an  evidence  of  the  present  connnercial  importance  to  the  United 
States  of  the.se  islands,  it  is  of  interest  to  note  that  of  the  #200,000,000  in  value 
of  exports  since  1876,  more  than  $180,000,000  in  value  came  to  this  country;  and  of 
the  $100,000,000  worth  of  imports  by  Hawaii  from  all  countries  during  the  same 
period  about  $70,000,000  worth  were  from  the  United  States.  In  this  present  year 
the  American  exports  to  Hawaii  will  equal  $6,000,000  as  against  about  $r,ooo,ooo 
only  twenty-two  years  ago.  It  is  officially  estimated  that  her  exports  to  the  United 
States  this  year  will  equal  in  value  $15,000,000,  while  in  1876 — only  twenty-two 
years  ago — they  did  not  much  exceed  $1,000,000  in  value.  So  thoroughly  Ameri- 
can has  that  traffic  become  that  already  go  per  cent  of  the  entire  shipments  from 
Hawaii  comes  to  this  country.  Were  we  not  enjoined  to  acquire  these  islands  as 
a  defense  to  our  traffic  on  the  Pacific  as  it  crosses  and  recrosses  at  all  hours  to  the 
Asiatic  shores? 

OUR  ASIATIC  TRADE. 

Our  annual  trade  with  the  Orient  amounts  in  value  to  over  $56,000,000.  Our 
exports  to  China  in  1895  were  only  $3,603,840  in  value,  while  they  will  reach  a  total 
this  year  of  nearly  $11,000,000.  Our  sales  to  that  country  the  present  year  will 
show  an  increase  over  those  of  nine  years  ago  of  over  300  per  cent!     Our  purchases 


86  THK   LOUISIANA   PURCHASE. 

from  the  same  country  only  show  an  increase  of  35  per  cent.  Of  our  total  exports 
to  Asia  we  have  made  a  >;ain  this  year  more  than  (lonl)!^  that  of  1890  and  ten  times 
greater  than  that  of  1870.  Across  the  Pacific  we  behold  nearly  one-half  of  the 
world's  population.  We  are  their  nearest  market,  and,  considerinj^  only  our  trade 
interests  and  merchant  marine,  should  we  not  exercise  the  utmost  vij^ilance,  not 
only  in  maintaininjr  and  extendinj^  this  valuable  commerce,  but  also  in  providing 
sufficient  safeguards  for  the  future? 

THK   .SANDWICH    I.SLANIXS   A   .SAKKCIUARI). 

Our  possession  of  the  Sandwich  Islands  is  a  safeguard.  Are  they  not  indis- 
pensable to  us  as  a  military  and  naval  outpost  for  the  defense  of  our  Pacific 
mainland  as  well  as  a  resting  place  and  depot  of  supply  for  our  merchant  ships 
and  those  of  our  Navy?  Should  not  .such  a  strategic  outpost  long  since  have 
been  added  to  our  domain?  Have  we  any  reason  to  apprehend  that  Hawaii  will 
add  discredit  tt  our  past  record  of  successful  annexation? 

The  Hawaiian  people  as  a  whole  are  to-day  further  advanced  educationally, 
industrially  and  commercially,  than  the  people  inhabiting  any  other  country  at 
the  time  of  its  ainiexation  or  cession  to  our  domain.  Their  Republic  has  been 
governed  in  a  wise,  economic  and  statesmanlike  manner.  Their  resources  are 
abundant  and  varied,  and  fully  justify  the  assurance  that,  with  the  added  stimulus 
which  annexation  will  give,  Hawaii  will  eventually  become  the  garden  spot  of  the 
world,  at  the  same  time  being  a  defensive  point  and  a  commercial  aid  to  our 
country. 

All  hail,  then,  this  last  acquisition  to  the  Great  Republic.  What  a  glorious 
interval  between  Louisiana  in  1803  and  Hawaii  in  1898.  As  the  illustrious 
Thomas  Jefferson,  for  his  annexation  of  the  empire  west  of  the  Mississippi,  crowned 
his  memory  with  imperishable  fame,  so  President  William  McKinley  has  added  to 
his  renown,  and  forever  endeared  himself  to  his  fellow-countrymen,  for  his  safe 
counsels  and  his  untiring  and  zealous  aid  in  the  annexation  of  Hawaii  to  our 
domain.  Together  we  link  the  names  of  these  two  great  Presidents  and  American 
annexationists — the  one  at  the  beginning  of  the  century,  the  other  at  its  close. 
The  succeeding  years  will  richly  vindicate  the  present  Executive  in  this  splendid 
act,  as  the  past  has  so  gloriously  verified  the  foresight  of  the  sage  of  Monticello 
in  his  record  of  annexation.  The  year  1898  will  be  a  precious  memory  to  all 
patriotic  Americans.  The  world  will  gaze  upon  its  record  in  wonder  and  admi- 
ration. The  part  which  Americans  have  acted  in  this  year  will  go  down  the 
ages.  It  will  read  in  the  future  more  like  fable  than  fact.  In  war  and  in  peace 
our  trophies  are  as  many  and  as  grand  as  they  are  marvelous  and  like  revelation. 

THE   NICARAGUA   CANAL. 

The  intelligent  judgment  of  the  American  people,  which  has  so  often 
approved  the  past  policy  of  our  country  in  reference  to  the  many  splendid  accessions 
to  our  domain,  will  not  hesitate  to  secure  still  further  advantages  by  the  same  wise 


THE   LOUISIANA    rURCHASK.  S7 

diplomacy.  This  lioiK- liaviuyj  now  hct-ti  realized  as  to  Hawaii,  and  the  track  of  our 
ininieiise  commerce  aloti^  the  oceanic  hif^hway  thus  far  lar}.>cly  jjrotected,  is  tliere 
not  still  another  important  duty  incuml)ent  upon  us,  as  imperative  as  it  is  essen- 
tial, and  which  api)eals  to  every  public-spirited  and  patriotic  American?  There  is; 
and  that  duty  calls  for  the  construction  of  the  Nicaraj^ua  Canal,  to  be  not  only 
constructed,  but  owned  and  controlled  by  our  (iovernment.  With  the  canal 
completed,  our  Atlantic  and  Pacific  seaboards  will  be  brou^^ht  nearer  together  by 
almost  1 1,000  miles.  In  the  event  of  war  with  any  nation  this  canal  will  bring  our 
military  and  naval  forces  from  both  oceans  with  quick  and  safe  dispat<'h  at  any 
threatened  point  along  our  coasts  or  ui)on  our  ishuul  possessions.  The  very 
.security  which  such  an  advantage  wotdd  confer  woidd  of  itself  often  prevent  con- 
fhct-s,  as  no  nation  would  hastily  engage  our  country  in  war  with  such  a  safeguard 
and  such  an  avenue  for  rapid  passage  and  national  defense.  The  commerce  of  the 
Atlantic  as  well  as  of  the  Pacific  demands  this  interoceanic  highway.  A  stream 
of  trafBc  will  pour  direct  from  the  great  rivers  and  lakes  on  the  one  side  to  tho.se 
on  the  other.  The  products  of  our  country  will  find  cheap  transportation  for  inter- 
change in  our  hotne  markets,  as  well  as  more  profitable  shipment  to  the  wider 
marts  of  the  world.  The  month  of  the  Columbia  river,  in  a  .sense,  will  be 
extended  to  theCUilf  of  Mc.cico,  and  the  mouth  of  the  Mississijjpi  to  the  Pacific 
Ocean.  i)ur  jjcople  will  become  more  closely  related.  Our  nation  will  become 
stronger  at  home  and  more  honored  abroad.  When  the  great  undertaking  shall 
have  been  accomplished,  it  can  then  be  said  that  of  all  achievements  in  our 
industrial  development  none  will  have  contributed  more  to  the  material  interests 
of  our  people  than  this  world-famed  project.  While  extending  our  already  vast 
commerce  and  dominion  it  will  also  contribute  to  the  defen.se,  the  honor,  and 
the  glory  of  our  beloved  country,  and  b  ■  a  monument  to  American  genius  and 
American  foresight  and  energy  as  long  as  time  shall  endure. 


